Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 2:40:48 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		Yes, but do you think you "Need" too? Thats my point. For example.....i'm playing an AI game, mid 42. I have semi veteran exp LBA's running regular raids on nearby Japanese TF's attempting to supply/deliver to it's bases for the AI's offensive. I have none on skip bombing because i'm getting decent returns at 6000-10000 feet. (Using B26's and Hudsons).




_____________________________


(in reply to dtravel)
Post #: 31
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 2:47:47 AM   
pompack


Posts: 2582
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dtravel

I'd do it against merchants with high (80+, like the manual states) experience 2E bombers but if I had a choice not against warships because of the AAA.  I don't do it at all with 4E because it doesn't "feel" historically right.  (Trying to play by the spirit of the rules, not the loopholes.)



Well said.

As to 4E bombers, I am not aware of a single, documented instance of a 4E bomber hitting a manuvering warship outside of coastal waters at any altitude in real life.

Now historically, 2E bombers were devastating when used in mass. The Americans called it "skip bombing", but the Germans did it first and called in the "Swedish Turnip", damned if I know why.

(in reply to dtravel)
Post #: 32
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 2:58:29 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack


quote:

ORIGINAL: dtravel

I'd do it against merchants with high (80+, like the manual states) experience 2E bombers but if I had a choice not against warships because of the AAA.  I don't do it at all with 4E because it doesn't "feel" historically right.  (Trying to play by the spirit of the rules, not the loopholes.)



Well said.

As to 4E bombers, I am not aware of a single, documented instance of a 4E bomber hitting a manuvering warship outside of coastal waters at any altitude in real life.

Now historically, 2E bombers were devastating when used in mass. The Americans called it "skip bombing", but the Germans did it first and called in the "Swedish Turnip", damned if I know why.



which again leads to my question to the players; Do they feel, outside of emergency situations where desperate tactics can be called for, that they even need to contemplate skip bombing against warships or merchants or are they seeing adequate returns at heights of 6-10k using 2E or 4E or both...

Like i said, i'm find esp against merchants, i don't need to even contemplate skip bombing.

_____________________________


(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 33
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 3:09:31 AM   
ctangus


Posts: 2153
Joined: 10/13/2005
From: Boston, Mass.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

which again leads to my question to the players; Do they feel, outside of emergency situations where desperate tactics can be called for, that they even need to contemplate skip bombing against warships or merchants or are they seeing adequate returns at heights of 6-10k using 2E or 4E or both...

Like i said, i'm find esp against merchants, i don't need to even contemplate skip bombing.


In non-desparate moments, only against barges, since the LBs won't attack them any higher. (And only if there's no fighter-bombers nearby.)

I'm getting decent results with 2Es from 6-10K also.

I almost never use 4Es on naval attack anymore. Again, only in desparate moments or if I have something spotted but my 2Es don't have the range. They get a fair number of hits just from naval search and I like to know what's out there.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 34
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 3:30:23 AM   
dtravel


Posts: 4533
Joined: 7/7/2004
Status: offline 		Do I need to skip bomb?  No, I don't "need" to bomb at any altitude less than 30,000'.  Do I want to stop the convoy as opposed to just hit a couple of ships in it?  Yes.

They didn't "need" to skip bomb in the real war.  They would have destroyed the Japanese Merchant Marine with 5,000' bombing runs too.  It was just faster and more efficient to hit with more than 1 out of 50 bombs. 

_____________________________

This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.

"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy

Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.


(in reply to ctangus)
Post #: 35
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 3:33:37 AM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Hi since UV I have used a standard 6k for both sides level bombers on naval attack. 10k for ground attack. If it gets too rough I go up to 15k. (I bomb cities with B-29 at 15k)

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to dtravel)
Post #: 36
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 3:37:35 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		really?

I don't agree with that accessment. LBA seemed pretty abysmal which includes the occasional hits...hence skip bombing. If players feel no particular compulsion to bomb at very low altitudes, including skip bombing then i'd say thats a good indicator that LBA might be a tad too effective overall. The Japanese merchant captains were certainly not all that concerned as Bismarck Sea developed....they thought it would be SOP for evasion. Imagine their suprise.....

_____________________________


(in reply to dtravel)
Post #: 37
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 4:11:29 AM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline 		It would help to have some mechanisms in place to replicate the problems associated with unloading transports at a beachhead as opposed to being underway in the open sea. Two entirely diffierent targets for LBA.

It would be even better to have a routine that has the less aggressive skipper "pull pitch", stop offloading and head to sea.

Sitting ships unloading vs ships underway do not seem to be distinguished, and unloading ships are not penalized at all for being attacked.



_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 38
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 5:28:54 AM   
niceguy2005


Posts: 12523
Joined: 7/4/2005
From: Super secret hidden base
Status: offline 		DId the Allies employ only skip bombing techiniques at the Battle of the Bismark sea, because as I recall it was a great big turkey shoot employing all sorts of bombers, including B-25, but not heavies. Also, IIRC they did not skip bomb in that battle as the techinque had not yet been perfected, but I could be wrong. In that battle I know that not only transports were sunk but numerous destroyers. I am also have read reports of all sorts of 2E bombers scoring tremendous success against Japanese shipping from late 43 on from all altitudes.

Still, it appears rare that 4E bombers participated in these attacks. I agree with the poster that this must have been a doctrine issue. I suspect this may have had something to do with the manueverability and speed of the aircraft. B-17s may have been too good a target for AA to fly lower level missions, not that they couldn't hit the target.

In terms of house rule or not, i would tend to lean toward the side of maybe installing a house rule that says heavies bomb above 10,000 feet. I all honesty I don't think it will make much of a difference anyway.

It also does seem to be fair to say that many of the games innaccuracies tend to balance out the game. I have noticed that I tend to fly a lot of my b-17 missions at the limits of the planes range, over very hostile territory and unescorted. I'm not sure that the bomber groups historically would have been put through that type of abuse.

_____________________________


Artwork graciously provided by Dixie

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 39
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 5:57:08 AM   
Skyros


Posts: 1570
Joined: 9/29/2000
From: Columbia SC
Status: offline 		I believe the employed a mixture of attacks at the Battle of the Bismark Sea. The only handy source that I have is Bergerud's Fire in the Sky he cite the 43rd Bomb Group sending out three waves of B17s on March 2,1943. Bombing from an altitude between 6 and 8,000 feet they sank two and mabye a third transport.(pg590) On the same page he cites B17s, A-20s, Beaufighters and B-25s attacking from medium altitude and also skip bombing.

Just one source I do not know how accurate he is.

_____________________________


(in reply to niceguy2005)
Post #: 40
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 7:24:49 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		IIRC, the skip bombing technique originated in a B-17 unit, but was quickly adapted to the more maneuverable twin engined bombers.



Nik, I have never felt the need to try skip bombing, as I have always felt that in UV/WITP the results from 6000' were "somewhat" high (the usual b(r)ad die rolls would result in snakeyes too often for my taste, but that's not an indictment of the game but rather what I've learned to experience since picking up AH games in the sixties).

Since starting my first CHS game, I have switched my 4E bombers to 11,000' for naval attack in order to hamstring them somewhat. As mentioned before, crucial situations will allow lower attmpts, but VERY rarely. I usually average around 16,000' for land targets.

I will use 4E bombers against naval targets up until the point when I actually have enough 2E bombers to do the job. I must be the typical American commander, but I never feel like I have enough 2E (especially B-25s) bombers in the SoPac and SWPac areas until Feb '43 at the earliest. That's partly because I rarely switch units among historical commands, except for those few being rescued from the PI and NEI.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Skyros)
Post #: 41
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 8:59:52 AM   
dtravel


Posts: 4533
Joined: 7/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

really?

I don't agree with that accessment. LBA seemed pretty abysmal which includes the occasional hits...hence skip bombing. If players feel no particular compulsion to bomb at very low altitudes, including skip bombing then i'd say thats a good indicator that LBA might be a tad too effective overall. The Japanese merchant captains were certainly not all that concerned as Bismarck Sea developed....they thought it would be SOP for evasion. Imagine their suprise.....


Not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing with me. What I'm saying is that bombing "normally" from 6K and higher, an attack on a convoy may result in one or two ships being hit and damaged. But the convoy continues its mission. The same attack as a 100' strafe/skip-bomb strike will sink or cripple nearly every ship in the convoy, stopping it from completing its mission.

_____________________________

This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.

"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy

Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.


(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 42
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 3:57:09 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		I understand that. By a good number of hits, i'm not talking the occasional bomb hit or two for damage. Hit rates are higher, thus more effective.

_____________________________


(in reply to dtravel)
Post #: 43
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 5:02:37 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline 		I never feel the need to do it. I'm more than happy with the results I can achieve from 6-10K compared to the potential loss of extra planes, pilots and morale/fatigue hits from 100 feet

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 44
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 5:19:13 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		Taken from a Navy PB4Y-1




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 45
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 5:20:11 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		Another low altitude attack by a PB4Y-1




Attachment (1)

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 46
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 5:22:27 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		The USAAF had a thing for high altitude bombing with their 4E types.  The USN was not so afflicted.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 47
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/25/2006 7:53:42 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		PB4Y-1 exchanges greetings with a U-boat (U-848).




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 48
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/26/2006 12:39:22 AM   
RUPD3658


Posts: 6922
Joined: 8/28/2002
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

B17's are rarely worth using on naval attack except as last resort until the PB4Y's start arriving in numbers they are to valuable in a search role.



You do not know what a great resourse you are not using.

B-17s set at 6000 feet (in the flak gap) have been my only fear so far in my game vs KDonovan. We are in September of 42 and they have been the only thing that could either stop me in my tracks or make me pause and reconsider.

If I send a TF within range it gets plastered. Even the Super KB with extra fighter squadrons can't stop more than a 100 plane B-17 strike without enough getting through to cause harm. 150 would sink ships and 200 would decimate the KB.

If I have a AF with tons of planes it gets plastered. Massed Zeros can barely stop them and Oscars can do little more than damage them. Even when I baet them in the air, enough get through to destroy just as many on the ground.

I have found that my fighters lose 1 plane for every 3 B-17s they manage to shoot down.

B-24s are actually easier to defend against since they are less durable. B-25s are little more than target practice.

The B-17 is the Allied super weapon for the 1st 6 months of the war just as the KB is for the Japanese. I would sleep much better if all Kenny used them for is naval patrol. Catalina and Coronados do just fine in this role.


_____________________________

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits"- Darwin Awards 2003

"No plan survives contact with the enemy." - Field Marshall Helmuth von Moltke


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 49
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/26/2006 12:43:56 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Agreed if KB closes then I would class that as an emrgancy ;)

Last couple of games I have gotten suckered into sending B17's to India and then no Invasion so I havent had the opportunity to use them on anti sipping

The few I have in SOPAC are better on search

(in reply to RUPD3658)
Post #: 50
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/26/2006 3:48:42 AM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dtravel

I'd do it against merchants with high (80+, like the manual states) experience 2E bombers but if I had a choice not against warships because of the AAA.  I don't do it at all with 4E because it doesn't "feel" historically right.  (Trying to play by the spirit of the rules, not the loopholes.)

But then none of you listen to me anyways 'cause I only play against the AI. 


We listen to ya when you talk sense, like that

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to dtravel)
Post #: 51
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/26/2006 5:24:42 AM   
dtravel


Posts: 4533
Joined: 7/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant


quote:

ORIGINAL: dtravel

I'd do it against merchants with high (80+, like the manual states) experience 2E bombers but if I had a choice not against warships because of the AAA.  I don't do it at all with 4E because it doesn't "feel" historically right.  (Trying to play by the spirit of the rules, not the loopholes.)

But then none of you listen to me anyways 'cause I only play against the AI. 


We listen to ya when you talk sense, like that


Then you should be listening to me at all times.

_____________________________

This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.

"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy

Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.


(in reply to tsimmonds)
Post #: 52
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/26/2006 6:41:04 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		From US Army Air Forces in World War II - Chaper 5: Battle of the Bismarck Sea. Photo captioned: "Direct Hit from a B-24". The bomber was well below 10000 ft though I can't judge the altitude.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to dtravel)
Post #: 53
RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks - 8/26/2006 6:43:11 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		Another pic from the same sight...captioned "Crippled Destroyer"...apparently taken by a level bomber and once again well below 10000 ft. There are some additional pics showing skip bombing attacks, etc.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by spence -- 8/26/2006 6:44:52 PM >

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 54
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: House rules for level bomber naval attacks Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.438