castor troy
Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: spence
The complaints against "200 4E bombers attacking KB at 1000 ft" seem mostly to revolve around the idea that USAAF doctrine did not support/include/advocate such attacks. The problem as I see it is that IJN doctrine did not support/include/advocate bringing KB anywhere near a place that could base 200 4E bombers. If that meant surrendering 1000 miles of ocean to the Allies then that's what KB did.
They were raiders not stand up fighters for air supremacy and the IJN recognized that. The game enhances the ability of KB to perform in the latter role. If the IJN Player is going to "experiment" with rather unlikely air supremacy missions against large concentrations of Allied LBA he should be prepared for the possible consequences and not cry foul when the Allied Player refuses to play by the "historical" rules.
(The concept of asymmetric warfare where one side follows rules/conventions and the other is free to ignore them has no place in a game about WWII IMHO.)
quote:
ORIGINAL: spence
The complaints against "200 4E bombers attacking KB at 1000 ft" seem mostly to revolve around the idea that USAAF doctrine did not support/include/advocate such attacks. The problem as I see it is that IJN doctrine did not support/include/advocate bringing KB anywhere near a place that could base 200 4E bombers. If that meant surrendering 1000 miles of ocean to the Allies then that's what KB did.
They were raiders not stand up fighters for air supremacy and the IJN recognized that. The game enhances the ability of KB to perform in the latter role. If the IJN Player is going to "experiment" with rather unlikely air supremacy missions against large concentrations of Allied LBA he should be prepared for the possible consequences and not cry foul when the Allied Player refuses to play by the "historical" rules.
(The concept of asymmetric warfare where one side follows rules/conventions and the other is free to ignore them has no place in a game about WWII IMHO.)
everything you write is fine... though perhaps you should come away from "don´t bring KB within 1000 miles of any Allied base size 5 because 200 4Es. Don´t bring ANY ship in range of 14 hexes of an Allied base size 5 because EVERY day there are 200 4Es ready to strike at any target they want.
Not even a third of the planes should be ready for a strike! Yes, also 200 Betties can be stacked at one base. Yes also there shouldn´t be 200 ready... no doubt. But if you want to talk about USAAF heavy bombers and really think those should be ready 100% to either attack an airfield OR at the same time be ready to attack shipping at 100 or 1000 ft then you´re off, completely. Again, same goes for Japanese.
The difference is huge though. As Allied I´m having perhaps 700 (or even more??) 4Es in my game in late 43, while I have perhaps 300 Betties as Japanese, so stacking 200 Betties in one place is just nuts, as nuts as having 2000 assault points on Wake... Stacking 170 4Es in 4 places is perfect, now you rule all your fronts... Those 4Es just NEVER would have been used in the role you describe it, you are some kind of dreaming about the USAAF sinking the whole Japanese fleet with 4Es at 100 ft like on one of those propaganda paintings. This imagination is as FANTASTIC as is the game we play. As fantastic as thinking about Betties sinking the whole US fleet. Now you will tell me that Betties use torps! Yes, they do. And with torps they can sink BBs. Yes, they do. And this is the only advantage a Betty has over a B-24. Every other target (means ship) will be sunk by the B-24. In late 43 all have such a high exp. that they don´t use 500 lb bombs in 90% of the cases I have seen so far, which means 1000 lb bombs which penetrate everything - except BBs. Put 3 1000 lb bombs into a IJN carrier or cruiser, it´s at least as dangerous for the ship as 3 torps into a USN carrier or cruiser. With the difference that I will achieve far more hits with my 80+ exp. USAAF heavy bombers at 1000 ft. (as I have 3 or 4 times more of them, carrying 4x1000 lb bombs instead of 1 torp, so 4 die rolls instead of 1 - means a higher chance to hit). While they won´t hit 16 times more, they will devastate every TF - again, except BBs.
The 4Es are the NUMBER ONE factor in this game. It should be called 4E bombers playing fantasy in the Pacific. No completely off production model for the Japanese, no Japanese torpedoe bomber, no super duper torpedoe availability everywhere is nearly as effecting the game like the completely overmodelled 4E bombers. Don´t know how far you came in PBEM so far, though from late 42 on there is nothing as powerful as my 4E fleet. And I don´t even use them (except Navy 4Es) for attacks on ships. I´m using them to drop more bombs than the 8th dropped in Europe, while targetting jungle strips. Airfields and ports all get wiped out (I don´t even do ressource/HI/oil attacks on occupied bases). And still this bomber fleet is so powerful, there´s nothing that is even 10% as influencing my game.
So if you think that pilots trained for flying attacks on airfields, factories,... should achieve more hits on ships that were achieved on factory complexes in real life then be it. IMO there should have been a hardcoded difference between bomber squadrons, or bomber daitais, that makes some available for attacks on ships and some (or perhaps the majority) not available (or highly ineffective if allowed to attack ships).
Again, I´m not saying the Japanese side is modelled anywhere more realistic, though that doesn´t make the current situation of Allied 4Es bombing in formations of hundred+ bombers at 1000 ft against 500 25mm flak guns any better. I remember again Denisohns article about Allied bombers attacking "armed merchantmen"   in the Bismarck sea. The B-25 complained about the heavy flak fire those "armed merchantmen" put up . Single Japanese merchants put up heavy flak fire???  Would love to see a 4E coming in at 1000 ft against an "AA undergunned" IJN cruiser or Battleship if single cruising "armed merchantmen" are not a target that is helpless it seems. And I bet even a 4E bomber in reality wouldn´t be happy if pumped full of 25mm ammunition... Can´t be really hard to hit such a BIG target at 1000 ft and I wonder what those 4E bombers in reality would have achieved if really going in against "KB" at 1000 ft. I bet they would have gone in level bombing at 10.000 ft+ and those 200 bombers would do a "car wash" on the carriers with a very, very low hit rate...
It´s not the same as the tests made with skip bombing against merchants...
< Message edited by castor troy -- 7/27/2007 11:37:07 AM >
_____________________________
|
Printable Version
Bombing Alt vs enemy shipping Question - 
I just have a problem with constraints on allied 4E (which seems to be the rave lately), but no constrants on other aspects of the game that effect Japan. 
Hopefully (which I doubt) there is a difference between a medium bomber dropping bombs on ships and a heavy bomber...
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