Why is the Avenger so bad?!?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Why is the Avenger so bad?!?

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 >> Why is the Avenger so bad?!?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/30/2007 11:20:46 AM

mc3744

Posts: 1957
Joined: 3/9/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline

I have a game in late '43.

I've used the carriers A LOT and Avenger, Dauntless and Barracuda have flown countless missions.

I've now observed for the hundredth time that 10 Barracuda will do more damage than 50 to 1000 TMB or TBF Avenger.
How is that?

Why do I almost always get to see the little smoke puff when the Avenger attack?

I'm not saying they never hit, but compared to the Barracuda (Or Kate or Betty, Nell, Beaufort, ...) it looks like a WWI plane.
Pilots experience is comparable.

Anybody any clue?

Thanks

_____________________________

Nec recisa recedit

Post #: 1

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/30/2007 11:33:21 AM

Martti

Posts: 237
Joined: 4/2/2005
Status: offline

It is not the Avenger, but the Mk 13 torpedo that is bad. Mk 13 has a dud rate of 50%, compared with 10% of every other airborne torpedo. The little smoke puff is a hit, but a dud.

(in reply to mc3744)

Post #: 2

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/30/2007 11:36:43 AM

mc3744

Posts: 1957
Joined: 3/9/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Martti

It is not the Avenger, but the Mk 13 torpedo that is bad. Mk 13 has a dud rate of 50%, compared with 10% of every other airborne torpedo. The little smoke puff is a hit, but a dud.

We are talking VERY, VERY bad

It makes the Avenger way less affective than any other anti-shipping plane the Allies have. And it's the main carrier based DB!

Thanks anyway

_____________________________

Nec recisa recedit

(in reply to Martti)

Post #: 3

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/30/2007 1:12:38 PM

m10bob

Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

Martti is correct..Gotta blame the USN back then for not correcting the problem with the torpedoes.
The Avenger itself was a fine,robust and gutsy machine, and can carry carrier-borne torps further than any other Allied torpedo bomber.
(See the much better results with the Brit torp in the same plane!)

_____________________________

(in reply to mc3744)

Post #: 4

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/30/2007 1:34:16 PM

mc3744

Posts: 1957
Joined: 3/9/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline

Actually in WitP the Barracuda has a longer range than any Avenger or Allied TB. 6 vs. 5

It is also a serious ship killer. In my longest game it sank countless Japanese ships, including the Yamato.

Does the torpedo get better in '44?

_____________________________

Nec recisa recedit

(in reply to m10bob)

Post #: 5

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/30/2007 2:08:07 PM

herwin

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mc3744

I have a game in late '43.

I've used the carriers A LOT and Avenger, Dauntless and Barracuda have flown countless missions.

I've now observed for the hundredth time that 10 Barracuda will do more damage than 50 to 1000 TMB or TBF Avenger.
How is that?

Why do I almost always get to see the little smoke puff when the Avenger attack?

I'm not saying they never hit, but compared to the Barracuda (Or Kate or Betty, Nell, Beaufort, ...) it looks like a WWI plane.
Pilots experience is comparable.

Anybody any clue?

Thanks

That shouldn't be the case. The Barracuda was a dog, and the RN replaced it with the Avenger in 1944-45.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to mc3744)

Post #: 6

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/30/2007 2:15:37 PM

mc3744

Posts: 1957
Joined: 3/9/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline

Well, I can assure you that in game the Barracuda is the best ship killer there is.

No way I'm going to upgrade it to Avenger II.

_____________________________

Nec recisa recedit

(in reply to herwin)

Post #: 7

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/30/2007 2:15:45 PM

herwin

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Martti

It is not the Avenger, but the Mk 13 torpedo that is bad. Mk 13 has a dud rate of 50%, compared with 10% of every other airborne torpedo. The little smoke puff is a hit, but a dud.

The problems were understood by mid-1943, and the version of the Mk 13 in general use by mid-1944 had a dud rate comparable with other airborne torpedoes and is now considered the best airborne torpedo of WWII. If the game engine doesn't model this, it needs fixing.

_____________________________

(in reply to Martti)

Post #: 8

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/30/2007 2:47:08 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mc3744

Well, I can assure you that in game the Barracuda is the best ship killer there is.

That's probably overstating it a bit. The Mk 13 torpedo does improve, like all other torpedoes with high dud rates.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to mc3744)

Post #: 9

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/30/2007 2:52:09 PM

Reg

Posts: 2787
Joined: 5/26/2000
From: NSW, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

That shouldn't be the case. The Barracuda was a dog, and the RN replaced it with the Avenger in 1944-45.

Supplement it maybe. The Barracuda was still the FAA bomber of choice in 1945/46 in the Australian Theatre. I have photos with HMS Collosus, HMS Glory, HMS Indomitable and HMS Vengence all supporting a Barracuda/Corsair airwing.

quote:

ID Number: 095778
Physical description: Black & white
Summary: AT SEA OFF RABAUL, NEW BRITAIN. 1945-09-06. FLIGHT CREWS PREPARING CORSAIR AND BARRACUDA AIRCRAFT ON THE FLIGHT DECK OF THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER HMS GLORY BEFORE TAKE OFF. THEY WILL CIRCLE OVERHEAD DURING THE SURRENDER CEREMONY BETWEEN LIEUTENANT GENERAL V.A.H. STURDEE, GENERAL OFFICER COMMANDING FIRST ARMY, GENERAL H. IMAMURA, COMMANDER EIGHTH AREA ARMY, AND VICE ADMIRAL J. KUSAKA, COMMANDER SOUTH EAST AREA FLEET.
Copyright: clear
Related subject: Aircraft carriers; Fairey Barracuda; Surrender ceremonies; Vought Corsair
Related unit: HMS Glory
Related place: New Britain; Rabaul
Related conflict: Second World War, 1939-1945

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Cheers,
Reg.

(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!

(in reply to herwin)

Post #: 10

Aircraft restoration enthusiasts cover your eyes please - 7/30/2007 3:00:22 PM

Reg

Posts: 2787
Joined: 5/26/2000
From: NSW, Australia
Status: offline

The reason for the dissappearance of the Avengers off RN carriers may have something to do with the picture below.

Note that there were also Barracudas in the picture (the tail bottom right) which are not lendlease and would only have been surplus to requirements....

quote:

ID Number: 124819
Date made: 16 January 1946
Physical description: Black & white
Summary: NO. 14 WHARF PYRMONT, NSW 1946-01-16. RN SAILORS, MOST OF WHOM WERE NOT OFFICIALLY ON DUTY, ENJOYING THEMSELVES SMASHING HOLES IN THE WINGS AND FUSELAGES OF ROYAL NAVY GRUMMAN AVENGER BOMBER AIRCRAFT. THESE AIRCRAFT WERE TO BE DUMPED FROM HMS PIONEER, A ROYAL NAVY REPAIR SHIP, INTO THE OCEAN OFF NSW. PART OF LOT TOTALLING 720, AND VALUED AT FIFTEEN MILLION POUNDS, THE ONLY EQUIPMENT REMOVED PRIOR TO DUMPING WERE COMPASSES, CLOCKS AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS. UNDER THE LEND LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED STATES, ANY MATERIAL BRANDED "USELESS" WAS TO BE DESTROYED. (PHOTOGRAPHER L. CPL E. MCQUILLAN)
Copyright: clear
Related subject: Grumman Avenger; Lend Lease
Related place: Pyrmont
Related conflict: Second World War, 1939-1945

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Reg -- 7/30/2007 3:20:24 PM >

_____________________________

Cheers,
Reg.

(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!

(in reply to Reg)

Post #: 11

RE: Aircraft restoration enthusiasts cover your eyes pl... - 7/30/2007 3:15:12 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

That happened all over, post-war. I read how a squadron's worth of USMC PBJ bombers were dumped off a pier in Hawaii.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Reg)

Post #: 12

RE: Aircraft restoration enthusiasts cover your eyes pl... - 7/30/2007 5:45:06 PM

m10bob

Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

Regarding the ranges, I play RHS where the ranges of the planes have been "corrected", as did CHS.
My intent is not to step on toes, anymore than any modder, but in order to get the game out, some of us feel certain aspects of the game were somewhat abbreviated or over-simplified in order to meet a semblance of uniformity with one another, (historical fact and capabilities sometimes suffering).
In RHS the TBF has a range of "8"........

_____________________________

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 13

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/30/2007 6:21:21 PM

mc3744

Posts: 1957
Joined: 3/9/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

quote:

ORIGINAL: mc3744

Well, I can assure you that in game the Barracuda is the best ship killer there is.

That's probably overstating it a bit. The Mk 13 torpedo does improve, like all other torpedoes with high dud rates.

I meant among Allied planes of course

Which one would you like better?

_____________________________

Nec recisa recedit

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 14

RE: Aircraft restoration enthusiasts cover your eyes pl... - 7/30/2007 6:21:50 PM

mc3744

Posts: 1957
Joined: 3/9/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob
In RHS the TBF has a range of "8"........

WOW

Cool

_____________________________

Nec recisa recedit

(in reply to m10bob)

Post #: 15

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/30/2007 6:42:13 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mc3744

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

quote:

ORIGINAL: mc3744

Well, I can assure you that in game the Barracuda is the best ship killer there is.

That's probably overstating it a bit. The Mk 13 torpedo does improve, like all other torpedoes with high dud rates.

I meant among Allied planes of course

Which one would you like better?

I actually haven't found the Avenger to be as bad as you say.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to mc3744)

Post #: 16

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/30/2007 6:52:03 PM

mc3744

Posts: 1957
Joined: 3/9/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline

I've been using the Barracuda extensively in one game only.
It's the one that is now in Nov '43.

I'm invading Okinawa and, as you can imagine, it took a lot of battles to get there,

I'd say that 7-8 times out of 10 every Barracuda's flight (4 planes) diving for the target would score a hit, while the Avenger would score every 2-4 times. More on already seriously damaged ships.

_____________________________

Nec recisa recedit

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 17

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/30/2007 7:30:53 PM

niceguy2005

Posts: 12523
Joined: 7/4/2005
From: Super secret hidden base
Status: offline

I found the Avenger to be an immdediate and definite upgrade from the rattling-death-trap that was the Devastator. Accuracy went way up. Torpedo dud rates fall-off and by 1944 the Avenger should be one of your primary ship killing weapons, along with LBA.

IMHO it isnt so much that the Avenger is bad in WitP as it is that the Betty and Nell are too good. I have foud hit rates among those 2 planes to be about 25%...much too high.

The Kate is probably about 10% (my guess, I haven't tested that) and that may be about right.

_____________________________

Artwork graciously provided by Dixie

(in reply to mc3744)

Post #: 18

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/31/2007 10:29:23 AM

m10bob

Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

I found the Avenger to be an immdediate and definite upgrade from the rattling-death-trap that was the Devastator. Accuracy went way up. Torpedo dud rates fall-off and by 1944 the Avenger should be one of your primary ship killing weapons, along with LBA.

IMHO it isnt so much that the Avenger is bad in WitP as it is that the Betty and Nell are too good. I have foud hit rates among those 2 planes to be about 25%...much too high.

The Kate is probably about 10% (my guess, I haven't tested that) and that may be about right.

I posted a thread a few months ago with a link to a Japanese pilots' narrative of a couple of squadrons being trained to attack with torpedoes, but in-game EVERY Betty and Nell unit has that ability.(The pilot served in one of the squadrons which attacked HMS Repulse and HMS POW...)
This can be corrected with the editor in making a separate slot for a couple of squadrons and making them torpedo bombers exclusively.
This would be both historic and more challenging for the Japanese player as to where to deploy them.

_____________________________

(in reply to niceguy2005)

Post #: 19

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/31/2007 10:41:56 AM

castor troy

Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

quote:

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

I found the Avenger to be an immdediate and definite upgrade from the rattling-death-trap that was the Devastator. Accuracy went way up. Torpedo dud rates fall-off and by 1944 the Avenger should be one of your primary ship killing weapons, along with LBA.

IMHO it isnt so much that the Avenger is bad in WitP as it is that the Betty and Nell are too good. I have foud hit rates among those 2 planes to be about 25%...much too high.

The Kate is probably about 10% (my guess, I haven't tested that) and that may be about right.

I posted a thread a few months ago with a link to a Japanese pilots' narrative of a couple of squadrons being trained to attack with torpedoes, but in-game EVERY Betty and Nell unit has that ability.(The pilot served in one of the squadrons which attacked HMS Repulse and HMS POW...)
This can be corrected with the editor in making a separate slot for a couple of squadrons and making them torpedo bombers exclusively.
This would be both historic and more challenging for the Japanese player as to where to deploy them.

Isn�t there a mod around that exactly does this? RHS?

_____________________________

(in reply to m10bob)

Post #: 20

RE: Why is the Avenger so bad?!? - 7/31/2007 2:01:47 PM

m10bob

Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

quote:

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

I found the Avenger to be an immdediate and definite upgrade from the rattling-death-trap that was the Devastator. Accuracy went way up. Torpedo dud rates fall-off and by 1944 the Avenger should be one of your primary ship killing weapons, along with LBA.

IMHO it isnt so much that the Avenger is bad in WitP as it is that the Betty and Nell are too good. I have foud hit rates among those 2 planes to be about 25%...much too high.

The Kate is probably about 10% (my guess, I haven't tested that) and that may be about right.

I posted a thread a few months ago with a link to a Japanese pilots' narrative of a couple of squadrons being trained to attack with torpedoes, but in-game EVERY Betty and Nell unit has that ability.(The pilot served in one of the squadrons which attacked HMS Repulse and HMS POW...)
This can be corrected with the editor in making a separate slot for a couple of squadrons and making them torpedo bombers exclusively.
This would be both historic and more challenging for the Japanese player as to where to deploy them.

Isn�t there a mod around that exactly does this? RHS?

I don't think the idea was accepted into RHS..I play RHS these days, and have been one of the testers for the last year.
It was kicked around but not adopted, as I recall.

_____________________________

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 21

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Why is the Avenger so bad?!?

Page: [1]