RE: Bombers (Full Version)

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



Message

FeurerKrieg -> RE: Bombers (2/11/2016 10:18:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

That is the side-effect of universal supply the Allies enjoy in WITP:AE. Just move all US 2E and 4E bombers to India, and the fuel, spare parts, bombs and replacement aircraft will be manufactured by the working poor of Calutta. No need to ship anything to India from USA.


All the more reason to liberate Calcutta from the Commonwealth. [:D]



rustysi -> RE: Bombers (2/12/2016 1:19:32 AM)

quote:

All the more reason to liberate Calcutta from the Commonwealth.


Yup.[;)]



crsutton -> RE: Bombers (2/12/2016 3:41:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

There's an easier way.[:D] Push the Allies back in NE India.[:'(]



When playing stock, I did not give AA a second thought. It was so ineffective that I did not bother to buy out American flak units from the West Coast and flew all of my Allied bombing attacks at 6,000 feet. With the recent patch and DaBabes it is an entirely different story. Allied heavy flak units really hamper Japanese bombers. To the point that even Allied units in the open can fend off Japanese bombers. This is more historically accurate as Japanese bombers were forced to bomb from very high altitudes by mid war due to the lethal effect of Allied AA. And mid and late war upgrades of shipping is now more important. Even Japanese flak has more bite. My bombers tend to stay above 10k now.



crsutton -> RE: Bombers (2/12/2016 3:51:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

The problem (for Japan) is that during early war it lacks a good interceptor plane. Only two models have a chance:

- A6M Zero is too feeble. No armor, low durability; each interception will cost significant losses.
- Ki-45a is not a dogfighter. so the preceding sweeps will take care of them easily.

Oscars, Tojos, etc are completely inadequate.








I believe the Zero would be better if they would press the attack more and do not break off combat so easily. I am sure the pilots have thoughts on their own in this game, so will not go simply "Banzai". At least not in the early phase. They are used to dogfighting in China and vs. Buffaloes in Burma, but not going against monsters [;)] Also they do not like the later Allied tactic of zoom and boom with their faster fighters. They think if the US doesnt want to dogfight them they are cowards. However sadly for them the tactic worked...[:'(]





This is the strength of Allied fighters at this stage of the war over Japanese. I don't really think many players notice it. Allied planes due to their durability and armor will take damage and remain in a fight. Unarmored Japanese planes will almost always break off and leave the action upon taking any damage. Watch some replays closely and you will see this. All other things being equal a large Allied fighter formation will eventually wear down a similar size Japanese one. People bitch about the weakness of Allied fighters in 1942 but I think that many do not understand how to use them in a way to maximize their strengths.



LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Bombers (2/12/2016 7:34:39 AM)

Interesting discussion. Yes, from my experience heavy bombers will get through no matter what. And Allied fighter are not weak in 1942. I have recently suffered a devastating air offensive in my PBEM against Ed aka IdahoNYer. I have seen B-17Es being outnumbered 10:1 by my CAP fighters - and the bombers got through without losses. I have also seen enemy sweeps being vastly outnumbered (for example 48:3, 45:2) - and getting away without losses and with kills on their own (A6M2, A6M3 and Oscars IIB vs. Wildcats and Beaufighters, not P-38s). That's with exp/air/def = 50+/70+/60+ pilots with good morale etc. flying at max altitude allowed for the "second-best mnvr band" house rule. I know that I am not the best player and I may not use optimal settings, still I expected less lopsided results in Nov 1942. 80% of my unrestricted air and ground forces are engaged in just trying to hold Burma against the Allied onslaught - something must be wrong with history [;)]. Kudos to Ed, he's a worthy opponent.



Lowpe -> RE: Bombers (2/12/2016 12:05:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

80% of my unrestricted air and ground forces are engaged in just trying to hold Burma against the Allied onslaught - something must be wrong with history [;)]. Kudos to Ed, he's a worthy opponent.


Mentioned on page 1...happens very frequently.

Of course this aids greatly in Allied Pacific Operations.[:(]



Jorge_Stanbury -> RE: Bombers (2/12/2016 2:57:55 PM)

Once the Allies (inevitably) destroy Magwe's oil, then Burma becomes a kind of useless dump... a very poor place to advance.

so maybe just let the oil go? there are other more easy to defend oil centers.. so no need to put 80% of Japan's airforce there.
The key is Calcutta. If Calcutta is in Japanese hands, it is hard to destroy Magwe, so make it a fortress, put some divisions there, take advantage of the strong defense multiplier. Once it falls, then Magwe oil will follow sooner than later




IdahoNYer -> RE: Bombers (2/12/2016 4:10:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

80% of my unrestricted air and ground forces are engaged in just trying to hold Burma against the Allied onslaught - something must be wrong with history [;)]. Kudos to Ed, he's a worthy opponent.


Mentioned on page 1...happens very frequently.

Of course this aids greatly in Allied Pacific Operations.[:(]



Thanks L_S_T, but I can't take any credit - its all in other's AARs, like Jorge's!

I've learned all my "great tactics" from those before me - some in the history books, but many right here in this great forum!!



IdahoNYer -> RE: Bombers (2/12/2016 4:25:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Once the Allies (inevitably) destroy Magwe's oil, then Burma becomes a kind of useless dump... a very poor place to advance.



I'm not sure I fully agree here Jorge...

Yes, Magwe's oil is a solid objective to be reduced - either by air or ground. However, Burma offers the Allies a way to fight the Japanese in late '42 and '43 that doesn't involve dealing with the KB - AND - the Allies have a good supply base in India, while the Jpn LOCs are pretty long.

And as Lowpe pointed out - IJA assets in Burma aren't in other areas of the Pacific. So, just putting pressure against Burma seems worthwhile. At a minimum it may take pressure off an IJA drive into China's back door at Paoshan (which is the main reason I started to increase Allied forces in Burma when L_S_T started heading in that direction). Whether or not the Allies intend to drive down to Rangoon later is a bigger question - one which doesn't need to be answered in late '42 or '43. Just getting a chance to fight the Jpn air and ground forces without having to do an Amphib with the KB running around to me is a worthwhile option.

And of course, using massed Allied Bombers (I wish I could mass like you did, but mine is a PDU-Off game), provides a great weapon to put pressure on the Japanese in Burma.



Jorge_Stanbury -> RE: Bombers (2/12/2016 4:48:49 PM)

Maybe I am doing something wrong, and a bit off-topic

but I am having big problems supplying anything below Chittagong.



IdahoNYer -> RE: Bombers (2/12/2016 4:56:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Maybe I am doing something wrong, and a bit off-topic

but I am having big problems supplying anything below Chittagong.



Yeah, a bit off topic and in an open forum.....but that said, I'm not having those issues...yet...

and before you ask, what I'm doing differently I have no idea.




LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Bombers (2/12/2016 5:04:29 PM)

Ed, you are violating an unwritten house rule: You shall not post in the forum when you have a turn to send back! [;)]



IdahoNYer -> RE: Bombers (2/12/2016 5:21:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Ed, you are violating an unwritten house rule: You shall not post in the forum when you have a turn to send back! [;)]



I figured I'd get chastised when I saw you on the forum....LOL[&o]

Will get it back to ya tonight! Promise!



Lowpe -> RE: Bombers (2/12/2016 6:10:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Ed, you are violating an unwritten house rule: You shall not post in the forum when you have a turn to send back! [;)]


[:D]
[:D]



rustysi -> RE: Bombers (2/12/2016 9:48:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Maybe I am doing something wrong, and a bit off-topic

but I am having big problems supplying anything below Chittagong.


Are you in the monsoon season? May15-Oct15 IIRC. If so the base draw limits and heavy ops could be causing you a problem.



Jorge_Stanbury -> RE: Bombers (2/13/2016 1:15:41 AM)

No it was after the monsoon, I think I brought too many divisions... so not only bombers [:D] and this is DaBabes-C with extended map/ stacking limits. Once you are overstacked, there is a severe supply penalty



Yaab -> RE: Bombers (2/13/2016 5:38:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Maybe I am doing something wrong, and a bit off-topic

but I am having big problems supplying anything below Chittagong.


Are you in the monsoon season? May15-Oct15 IIRC. If so the base draw limits and heavy ops could be causing you a problem.



The whole area below Darjeeeling is supply-starved. You have to ship supply directly from Calcutta to Chittagong. Single xAKLs with 1000-1500 supply capacity give you the fastest turnaround time at both ports. Then the supply will trickle from Chittagong to the units below it.



JocMeister -> RE: Bombers (2/13/2016 7:38:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Interesting discussion. Yes, from my experience heavy bombers will get through no matter what. And Allied fighter are not weak in 1942. I have recently suffered a devastating air offensive in my PBEM against Ed aka IdahoNYer. I have seen B-17Es being outnumbered 10:1 by my CAP fighters - and the bombers got through without losses. I have also seen enemy sweeps being vastly outnumbered (for example 48:3, 45:2) - and getting away without losses and with kills on their own (A6M2, A6M3 and Oscars IIB vs. Wildcats and Beaufighters, not P-38s). That's with exp/air/def = 50+/70+/60+ pilots with good morale etc. flying at max altitude allowed for the "second-best mnvr band" house rule. I know that I am not the best player and I may not use optimal settings, still I expected less lopsided results in Nov 1942. 80% of my unrestricted air and ground forces are engaged in just trying to hold Burma against the Allied onslaught - something must be wrong with history [;)]. Kudos to Ed, he's a worthy opponent.


No offense meant but you are certainly doing something wrong. As a rule of thumb allied 4Es will suffer around 1 downed plane for every airborne enemy fighter. This after OPS losses are counted. If they are getting through without losses you have your CAP placed at the wrong altitude. So he is either flying above or under your CAP. Considering allied replacements rate you can ill afford doing unescorted strikes where enemy CAP is present.

Regarding the 2nd maneuver band HR its actually one of the worst and most disruptive HRs you can have. As Japan this should give you a huge boost in 42 and 43 where you have the Tojo (which by your HR has access to the 31k altitude). In contrast only the Hurricane IIc and P38s have access to the same altitude. The backbone of the Allied air force the P39 and P40s doesnīt. So you should be crushing your opponent with high altitude sweeps placed above his CAP.

All this will of course change when the P47 arrives. They in turn have access to an ever higher altitude so your opponent will sweep you into oblivion until you can throw out thousands of Frank "Rs" which have access to the same MVR band as the P47. You can then put up a good fight and overwhelm P47s by sheer numbers.

This is the main problem with the 2nd MVR band HR. Its makes the entire air war about which planes have access to which altitude bands. Highest wins. I would strongly recommend to do away or change the HR. Personally I use a max altitude HR which is the same for both sides. This somewhat negates the insane dive bonus.

I would recommend you to read Obverts AAR when he was playing me a couple of years back. We used the same HR and Erik was absolutely killing me in the air until I got the Hellcat and P47.




LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Bombers (2/13/2016 11:53:02 AM)

Thanks for the comments. I may have gotten something wrong - in my interpretation of "second-best mnvr band", the Tojos (and Zeros) are limited to max 20k, the Oscars to 15k. 31k for Tojos would put them in their "second-worst" band for me. This is with DBB-C.



JocMeister -> RE: Bombers (2/13/2016 3:22:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Thanks for the comments. I may have gotten something wrong - in my interpretation of "second-best mnvr band", the Tojos (and Zeros) are limited to max 20k, the Oscars to 15k. 31k for Tojos would put them in their "second-worst" band for me. This is with DBB-C.


Just checked. Your are absolutely right. [:)]

I was playing a stock game against Erik. Latest DBBs contain Symons new AC files which changed a lot of stuff around. Not sure if it will be good or bad for you. But I think Symon made some Japanese fighters real killers like the George?

Regarding the Allied 4Es look at what altitude his bombers are flying and set your cap 1k above that. Donīt forget looking at OPS losses. These will often surpass the A2A kills by a large margin.



rustysi -> RE: Bombers (2/13/2016 11:44:35 PM)

quote:

This is the main problem with the 2nd MVR band HR. Its makes the entire air war about which planes have access to which altitude bands. Highest wins. I would strongly recommend to do away or change the HR. Personally I use a max altitude HR which is the same for both sides. This somewhat negates the insane dive bonus.


This is good to know as I play stock. Would you mind posting those altitudes, as I forgotten what they are.



JocMeister -> RE: Bombers (2/14/2016 6:10:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

This is the main problem with the 2nd MVR band HR. Its makes the entire air war about which planes have access to which altitude bands. Highest wins. I would strongly recommend to do away or change the HR. Personally I use a max altitude HR which is the same for both sides. This somewhat negates the insane dive bonus.


This is good to know as I play stock. Would you mind posting those altitudes, as I forgotten what they are.


Going completely by memory I think it was something like:
41-42: 20k
43: 25k
44-: 30k

Erik and I had a much better experience once we did away with the 2nd best MVR band. No more 50:1 results. [:)]



obvert -> RE: Bombers (2/14/2016 10:03:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister


quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

This is the main problem with the 2nd MVR band HR. Its makes the entire air war about which planes have access to which altitude bands. Highest wins. I would strongly recommend to do away or change the HR. Personally I use a max altitude HR which is the same for both sides. This somewhat negates the insane dive bonus.


This is good to know as I play stock. Would you mind posting those altitudes, as I forgotten what they are.


Going completely by memory I think it was something like:
41-42: 20k
43: 25k
44-: 30k

Erik and I had a much better experience once we did away with the 2nd best MVR band. No more 50:1 results. [:)]


As Jocke says. This will help gameplay and I've used the same in several games to good effect. I even do this when playing H to H or against the AI from my side as it just makes more sense.

The last one is usually 31k for 44 and then it's kind of fine to let the doors open for 45 to any altitude, as this does help the Allies stay positive against most better Japanese models that have been pushed forward (and produced heavily). The P-47, P-51 and later Corsairs have higher ceilings than the Ki-84 and many other late war planes. If the Japanese end up with K-83, J7W and Ki-94 too early the Allies are screwed anyway. [:)]



LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Bombers (2/14/2016 11:45:04 AM)

That is for PDU off?



JocMeister -> RE: Bombers (2/14/2016 1:25:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
As Jocke says. This will help gameplay and I've used the same in several games to good effect. I even do this when playing H to H or against the AI from my side as it just makes more sense.

The last one is usually 31k for 44 and then it's kind of fine to let the doors open for 45 to any altitude, as this does help the Allies stay positive against most better Japanese models that have been pushed forward (and produced heavily). The P-47, P-51 and later Corsairs have higher ceilings than the Ki-84 and many other late war planes. If the Japanese end up with K-83, J7W and Ki-94 too early the Allies are screwed anyway. [:)]


Erik! [&o]

Glad to see you are still around at least sporadically. Any chance of a full blown comeback? [:)]



BBfanboy -> RE: Bombers (2/14/2016 2:35:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

That is for PDU off?

Don't think the Japanese can get those high end aircraft with PDU off.



JocMeister -> RE: Bombers (2/14/2016 2:41:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

That is for PDU off?


We played with PDU ON. But Iīm playing with the same HRs in another PDU OFF game now. [:)]



rustysi -> RE: Bombers (2/15/2016 1:33:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister


quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

This is the main problem with the 2nd MVR band HR. Its makes the entire air war about which planes have access to which altitude bands. Highest wins. I would strongly recommend to do away or change the HR. Personally I use a max altitude HR which is the same for both sides. This somewhat negates the insane dive bonus.


This is good to know as I play stock. Would you mind posting those altitudes, as I forgotten what they are.


Going completely by memory I think it was something like:
41-42: 20k
43: 25k
44-: 30k

Erik and I had a much better experience once we did away with the 2nd best MVR band. No more 50:1 results. [:)]


As Jocke says. This will help gameplay and I've used the same in several games to good effect. I even do this when playing H to H or against the AI from my side as it just makes more sense.

The last one is usually 31k for 44 and then it's kind of fine to let the doors open for 45 to any altitude, as this does help the Allies stay positive against most better Japanese models that have been pushed forward (and produced heavily). The P-47, P-51 and later Corsairs have higher ceilings than the Ki-84 and many other late war planes. If the Japanese end up with K-83, J7W and Ki-94 too early the Allies are screwed anyway. [:)]


That's what I thought, but wasn't sure. Sounds like the way to go. Thanks for the responses.[:)]



LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Bombers (2/16/2016 4:02:03 PM)

Grr... In my PBEM my opponent has been sending three B-17Es against Broome at night for five or six consecutive turns. I try to counter with an entire group of Nicks at 60% night CAP. Pilot exp, fatigue, morale etc. ok and each night 15 to 23 Nicks tangle with the three beasts. Results - each night I lose 2-3 Nicks to bombers, with the odd beast being damaged now and then. Wtf?!?



Yaab -> RE: Bombers (2/16/2016 4:24:38 PM)

Just park 15-18 big AA guns there and the three B-17s will score no hits on the base. 5 big AA guns per one 4E seems to disrupt their targeting for good.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
5.187012