RE: Is this gamey? (Full Version)

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



Message

Lowpe -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/13/2016 9:20:18 PM)

Iboat heaven!



Ambassador -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/13/2016 9:27:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager

Turn sent. 16 ship TF
421 Wildcats
32 SBDs set on 100% naval search
18 float planes set on 100% naval search

We will see how this goes [:(]

Don't forget ASW air patrols, an unplanned encounter with a torpedo might wreak havoc to one of your CVs...



Lokasenna -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/13/2016 9:46:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager

and some of the others have to be back in Japan for repair since they have been at sea for a full six months.



This could be a fatal assumption, especially since I don't think it's necessarily correct.



My submarines spotted two different ones that had smoke coming from them.
This was 3 turn ago moving through the straights of Taiwan towards Japan.
He has had them at sea since Dec 7th with almost no pause. They have to be running over 10-15 system damage.

I know he has 4-5 carriers on the west coast of Australia from the number of AC involved in strikes.

I am not saying my plan is perfect. But I have some of the odds worked out and I know I am taking a risk. Plus I like trying new things and this is definitely a new concept.
At least for me!


Yes, but he does not have to be in Japan to repair system damage. He could be anywhere... when I'm standing my carriers down for system damage repair, as Japan, I rarely even enter Pier Side mode. I leave them in port at Readiness in case I need to sortie them.

He could do precisely this to you, and because it's still 1942, your aircraft pools are unforgiving and your aircraft themselves are underwhelming. You're taking a bigger risk than I would, and I sent 90% of my USN ships to the coast of Japan in April of 1942.



Fallschirmjager -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/15/2016 3:01:10 PM)

A bit of deception. The day before I launched my plan. My opponent invaded Attu island.
So now 4 turns later and I just moved my carrier TF 1 hex north of Midway. It was detected by a submarine float plane that my opponent always keeps around Midway.
The next turn I made a hard southwest turn towards the Cent Pac.

If his scouting was good and he detected carriers then he may think I was reacting to the Attu invasion since the direction of the TF was NW.
If he has any carriers supporting this invasion then this may pull them there and away from my raid.

I have about three more turns of sailing before I hit the Entiwok area and begin my plan in earnest.
I did use advice and put my TBD's on 100% search and put 50% of my float planes on ASW and 50% on search and 100% of my SBD's on ASW.
I also added two DD's to my TF that were sitting at Midway escorting a convoy of fuel.
They are also modern DD's that are fast.


I had CAP set to 30% up to now to save on rest and wear and tear and turn after next I will turn it up to 100%
My CAP has already splashed two IJN Float snoop planes



btd64 -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/15/2016 3:58:47 PM)

Those float planes are probably flying out of one of the islands nearby or a sub. Pretty easy to shut down....GP



rustysi -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/15/2016 10:26:17 PM)

quote:

We are at June 3rd 1942 and so far I have shot down 1200 Betties


Your opponent doesn't seem to know how to protect his A/C. That being said you are still jeopardizing a strategic asset for a perceived minor tactical gain.[:-] Against a good opponent I see this going badly for you.[:(]



Fallschirmjager -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/18/2016 8:27:41 PM)

First air attack was feeble. 13 Nells escorted by 5 Rufe's
Rufe's are tough to deal with. I had over 170 wildcats engage them and downed one and damaged two before they fled.
I had two wildcats damaged.
I managed to down three Nells and damage 2 more before they also fled.

Nothing got through.
The next turn should press deeper into the Marshalls and produce a greater response unless he just shuts down all his airfields.

The Rufe is a bastard of a plane. Hard to shoot down and hard to even damage.

My CAP also splashed 3 more float scouts.



Leandros -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/18/2016 10:47:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager

First air attack was feeble. 13 Nells escorted by 5 Rufe's
Rufe's are tough to deal with. I had over 170 wildcats engage them and downed one and damaged two before they fled.
I had two wildcats damaged.
I managed to down three Nells and damage 2 more before they also fled.

Nothing got through.
The next turn should press deeper into the Marshalls and produce a greater response unless he just shuts down all his airfields.

The Rufe is a bastard of a plane. Hard to shoot down and hard to even damage.

My CAP also splashed 3 more float scouts.


Doesn't look very promising so far.....[:-]...

Fred



Grfin Zeppelin -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/18/2016 11:24:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager



The Rufe is a bastard of a plane. Hard to shoot down and hard to even damage.




Uhm wut ?
Its basically a downgraded A6M2.Slow,unmaneuverable and made out of paper tissue. Its the second worst fighter the IJN fields in the whole game next to the very obsolete Claude.
In short, a flying coffin.



rustysi -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/18/2016 11:34:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager



The Rufe is a bastard of a plane. Hard to shoot down and hard to even damage.




Uhm wut ?
Its basically a downgraded A6M2.Slow,unmaneuverable and made out of paper tissue. Its the second worst fighter the IJN fields in the whole game next to the very obsolete Claude.
In short, a flying coffin.


Agreed, but would I love to have them at the start of the war. They could be very useful early on against the weak Allies. After that they make good trainers.[:D]



Grfin Zeppelin -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/18/2016 11:40:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager



The Rufe is a bastard of a plane. Hard to shoot down and hard to even damage.




Uhm wut ?
Its basically a downgraded A6M2.Slow,unmaneuverable and made out of paper tissue. Its the second worst fighter the IJN fields in the whole game next to the very obsolete Claude.
In short, a flying coffin.


Agreed, but would I love to have them at the start of the war. They could be very useful early on against the weak Allies. After that they make good trainers.[:D]

Yes they would be incredible usefull if you had them in December already. They aint useless even when they arrive in April in some locations.



rustysi -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/19/2016 12:06:13 AM)

quote:

They aint useless even when they arrive in April in some locations.


True, like anything else in this game, its up to the player to find the niche in which things work best.



crsutton -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/19/2016 4:02:34 AM)

1,200 betties shot down! Go ahead and do it. Your opponent does not have a clue anyways....[8|]



rustysi -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/19/2016 4:31:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

1,200 betties shot down! Go ahead and do it. Your opponent does not have a clue anyways....[8|]


Yup.[sm=Cool-049.gif]



Grfin Zeppelin -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/19/2016 9:38:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

1,200 betties shot down! Go ahead and do it. Your opponent does not have a clue anyways....[8|]

And that in June 1942, I ponder how that is even possible. Japan starts the war with like 500. 50(Betty and Nell) get produced each month.
So even if his oponent did some crazy expansion it would still mean he shot down ALL of them.



Lowpe -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/19/2016 1:43:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

1,200 betties shot down! Go ahead and do it. Your opponent does not have a clue anyways....[8|]

And that in June 1942, I ponder how that is even possible. Japan starts the war with like 500. 50(Betty and Nell) get produced each month.
So even if his oponent did some crazy expansion it would still mean he shot down ALL of them.


Probably a fair bit of fog of war in that number.[;)]



Leandros -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/19/2016 2:09:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe



Probably a fair bit of fog of war in that number.[;)]



Possibly, playing against the Japanese AI I'm in august '42 with more than a thousand Bettys downed. It's probably easier against the AI?

Fred



Pilsator -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/20/2016 9:58:47 AM)

If I question my self if it is gamey, then I wont do it. Thats my personal house rule.



Fallschirmjager -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/20/2016 8:40:59 PM)

This is PBEM and we are using AndyMac's ironman

I am more experienced than my opponent so he has a lot more stuff to use.
He has 40-50 Betties making attacks in China.

I am sure FOW is exceeding the number but I have shot down a lot of planes.

He was also super aggressive the first week of the war and sunk a lot of good transports and tankers by moving his Betties forward and trapping them as I was trying to flee Burma/DEI/Philipines

He sank a lot of ships and lost a lot of planes.
I still have a fuel tank crunch so maybe it was worth it?

I am not taking it easy on him, but he is newer at the game than I am and we are trying to balance things a bit.
That is why we choose a scenario designed to give the AI a huge boost.



HansBolter -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/20/2016 10:01:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

1,200 betties shot down! Go ahead and do it. Your opponent does not have a clue anyways....[8|]

And that in June 1942, I ponder how that is even possible. Japan starts the war with like 500. 50(Betty and Nell) get produced each month.
So even if his oponent did some crazy expansion it would still mean he shot down ALL of them.


Against the AI its pretty standard. The AI sends unescorted netties into heavy CAP day in and day out.



geofflambert -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/21/2016 12:26:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pilsator

If I question my self if it is gamey, then I wont do it. Thats my personal house rule.


+1 Here! Here! Don't do goofy stuff you know wouldn't have happened. Spelling note" I know you meant won't as in 'will not' but wont without the apostrophe indicating a contraction means you are likely to do it, as that is your practice.

An example: "I am wont to look at girls in bikinis" means you're a prevert [sic]. Well not really.



AW1Steve -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/21/2016 1:46:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pilsator

If I question my self if it is gamey, then I wont do it. Thats my personal house rule.


+1 Here! Here! Don't do goofy stuff you know wouldn't have happened. Spelling note" I know you meant won't as in 'will not' but wont without the apostrophe indicating a contraction means you are likely to do it, as that is your practice.

An example: "I am wont to look at girls in bikinis" means you're a prevert [sic]. Well not really.


Actually he wouldn't be a pervert. Now if he was looking at GUYS in bikini's.........[:D]



geofflambert -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/21/2016 3:40:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pilsator

If I question my self if it is gamey, then I wont do it. Thats my personal house rule.


+1 Here! Here! Don't do goofy stuff you know wouldn't have happened. Spelling note" I know you meant won't as in 'will not' but wont without the apostrophe indicating a contraction means you are likely to do it, as that is your practice.

An example: "I am wont to look at girls in bikinis" means you're a prevert [sic]. Well not really.


Actually he wouldn't be a pervert. Now if he was looking at GUYS in bikini's.........[:D]


I didn't say anything about perverts, I was referring to preverts just like Major Bat Guano.



Pilsator -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/21/2016 7:51:46 AM)

I have two apostrophs on my keyboard, both with a key combination that are near to breaking me my fingers, so No"'" and no "'" AND NO "`". Actually that are three. So I refuse to use them.

I take the bikini girls !! [;)]



Fallschirmjager -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/21/2016 2:06:56 PM)

Second turn is more productive but also shows the dangers.
Rufe's and Zeroes escort Betties, Nells and army Sally's (I think that is the army bomber)

He has layered his attacks and escorts and it pulls my CAP every where.
The escorts and CAP tangle and not much damage to either side. I shoot down some bombers. 4 Betties get torpedo runs but choose the CLAA Atlanta. They get a stern attack only (thank goodness) and miss.
Other Betties come in 1's and 2's but don't get good attacks as the AA is fierce.

Other level bombers attack at 1000, 2000 and 3000 feet.
My ships spend the morning evading at high speed.
The USS Porter takes a 100 kg bomb to the forecastle and is damaged. It could have been much worse.
The system damage is 27, fires are under control and flooding is only 4. She turns toward Noumea at 23 knots.
The entire TF gives up forcing it's way to the PI and turns south.

All in all not a bad day but not what I was hoping. This was an interesting experiment but time to end it.
On the day I have 13 Wildcats damaged and lose 4 and 2 more to OPS.
I shoot down 4 Rufes and damage 3-5 more. I down 3 Zeroes and damage 4-7 more.
I shoot down 20+ bombers and flak shoots down 5-7 more. I damage maybe a dozen.

I am getting results but due to weather and my CAP having to rapidly change altitude some of his bombers are getting through.
The Atlanta is lucky that those Betties did not get a side shot. Otherwise they would of put 1-3 torpedo's into her and I might of lost a good ship.
I also had 1 SBD shot down on patrol and another lost to OPS.

Next turn I expect him to stand down his forces and he has probably scrambled surface ships and subs to try and stop me.

Changing course south should throw him off.
I will stop at Suva to refuel my DD's and then head back to PH.

The Porter will get limited repairs at Noumea and then to Sydney to fully repair.



Fallschirmjager -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/21/2016 2:21:53 PM)

I would also not call my plan a complete failure. This was an interesting experiment and I DO think this plan has merit.
June 1942 is just too early to launch it.

I think this could be a devastating weapon in say late 1943 and 1944 as the Allies have to invade.

Replicate what I did. But use CVLs to beef up ASW and search but NOT to attack. Maybe leave a few squadrons on naval attack to ward off naval attack.
Escort with fast battleships.
Use the fast carriers at 100% cap stacked with extra Marine squadrons. Take them to your invasion spot and let them sit on a patrol grid for 3-5 turns.
Let them soak up attacks.
Thin out LBA

Then move in your invasion force and lets a second smaller fleet of fleet carriers and CVLs and CVEs act as LR Cap to protect the landings.

You might be able to grind up Japanese LBA and make landings easier with less ships lost.

Airfield attacks are also still a method but I find flak and OPS loses to be extreme but doing these with carrier borne bombers.
Drawing them out and letting them attack you seems to be a better method.


Or maybe I am just crazy and too willing to try new ideas.
But I have learned from this.
And this has been great for my pilots. Their air and defense skills are increasing rapidly but so is fatigue.



Admiral DadMan -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/21/2016 2:31:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager

...I think this could be a devastating weapon in say late 1943 and 1944 as the Allies have to invade...


One word: Hellcats.



mussey -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/21/2016 3:53:31 PM)

quote:

This was an interesting experiment...


Agreed. Not sure why you incurred flack by others. Any plausible change in tactics is interesting, especially when well-documented and shared with others here. Excellent learning experience, thanks.



Lowpe -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/21/2016 3:58:43 PM)

Later in the war you have several better advantages:

Better and more radar.

More experienced and better pilots (hopefully).

Better fighters.

More flak.

More experienced ship crews.



Admiral DadMan -> RE: Is this gamey? (4/21/2016 4:10:09 PM)

A big drawback to this experiment (from personal experience/observation) is that even with well trained pilots and upgraded radar, Wildcats still get the butts handed to them by Zeros.



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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.639648