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: A Thought...

 
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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: A Thought... Page: <<   < prev  45 46 [47] 48 49   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A Thought... - 1/12/2009 4:48:16 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Why aim so small?

Is it possible to retake Iwo Jima? If you SWEEPed the island with KB's fighters and then used your land-based bombers to smash the airfield while KB's strikegroups sank any shipping around the island wouldn't that give you an opportunity to land troops?

Even if that isn't possible what I would suggest is crafting an operation designed to destroy all the planes on the ground and all the shipping at sea or in the port before withdrawing and seeking to design further operations to do similar things elsewhere.

Canoerebel seems to have dissipated his forces massively and this gives you an opportunity to destroy those forces in detail. I would seek to take it.


As to Wake... WHY is it destined to fall? If you air transport in lots of troops why wouldn't it hold? I routinely air transport in troops to hold bases the enemy is threatening and manage to hold them. Why would Wake be any different?


Nemo--I personally love the idea of counterattacking and trying to take Iwo Jima back but I don't have the troops at the moment. Now--that being said--I do have massive reinforcement coming on June 14th. I get 4 Inf Brigades and 4 Inf Divisions spread around Japan and the Philippines.

The realistic problem is that I could never retake Iwo due to him STILL having all 25 units there that he landed with. They are STILL there. I could look back in the AAR but it was a massive landing and he never pulled the troops back out.

There is little I can do with Wake. He is flying a CAP of 50+ Hellcats everyday. If he pulled away from the atoll, I would be HAPPY to fly in units from Marcus or Kwajalein. I'll watch the see what he does.


< Message edited by John 3rd -- 1/12/2009 4:49:28 AM >

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1381
RE: The Battle Totals--Part Three - 1/12/2009 6:54:43 AM   
Heeward


Posts: 343
Joined: 1/27/2003
From: Lacey Washington
Status: offline 		You need to bee setting up your sub screen yesterday.


_____________________________

The Wake

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1382
RE: The Battle Totals--Part Three - 1/12/2009 4:28:55 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		I have 3 Glen-SS moving to set-up a recon screen NE of Iwo Jima.  My SS near Laysen Isle are having a field day hitting Allied shipping so I won't pull them off of their duties until the Torps run out.

The planes are all moving.  I must have moved 1,500 planes for the June 13th turn.  My Operation will commence about June 18th.  I have to pause for several reasons:
1.  Fuel--My ships at Saipan need fuel badly.  I have 125,000 fuel moving towards Saipan.  The TF is 6 hexes SW of Naha and moving at Full Speed.
2.  Upgrades--I shifted 3 Sentai and 4 Daitai of newer model planes back to A6M3a/Oscar airframes so they have the range to reach Iwo.
3.  Bombers--The Frances/Betty 2/Helen have been moving all throughout the map to get to Tokyo/Saipan/Pagan/Tinian.

Impact:
1.  I am suspending all my AK/TK Convoys for the time being with pulling away all my ASW TF.
2.  This has opened some AF up to possible attack as I've massively shifted Fighters around.

Strategic Bombing:
1.  Looks like Dan will be using Paramushiro Jima as a 4EB Base.  I cannot take B-29 but can B-17/B-24
2.  No attacks this turn from Sakhalin or Iwo Jima




_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Heeward)
Post #: 1383
RE: The Battle Totals--Part Three - 1/12/2009 7:08:43 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Combat Report
June 14, 1944

Forces continue to move into attack positions throughout the area surrounding Iwo Jima.  This operation will commence directly after fuel arrives at Saipan.

Dan had a heavy Strategic Bombing turn.

Nagasaki
As expected Dan attacked somewhere I weakened and I got hurt.

First Wave (Iwo Jima)
65 P-38 and 122 4EB vs. 57 Fighters--I lose 26 Fighters for 1 P-38 and 2 B-17 with 23 4EB damaged.  These bombers choose to hit the Naval Shipyards and inflict 31 hits.

2nd Wave (China)
35 Fighters vs. 38 B-29--No losses for 1 B-29 and 12 Damaged.  This attack hits shipping within the harbor and it hurts.  I have 2 CA NEARLY finished repairing and they get hit hard.

3rd Wave (Sakhalin)
33 Fighters vs. 21 B-29--No losses for 2 B-29 and 9 Damaged--No Damage.

Those cruisers were nearly rep;aired and I was waiting for them to upgrade.  Damn...

Sendai
1st Wave (Sakhalin)
72 Fighters vs. 20 P-38--Lose 12 Fighters for 10 P38.  This isn't too bad of result.

2nd Wave (Sakhalin)
60 Fighter vs. 21 P-38 and 115 4EB--7 Japanese Fighters fall in exchange for 11 P-38 and 10 Liberators.  VERY NICE!  They do 21 Resources Damage.


Total Losses for the Day in Aircraft:  45 Japanese Fighters for 21 P-38, 10 B-24, 1 B-17, and 5 B-29.



_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1384
Operation Shimakaze - 1/12/2009 7:32:34 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Operation Shimakaze
"Island Wind"

Diversion
I order 2 Inf Div and 2 Inf Brigade in Tokyo to begin prepping for a landing at Tori Shima.  We will trust for American intelligence to pick-up on this little fact to draw his attention.  Additionally, I order a large number of Army bombers to smash Tori Shima's AF to try to get Dan to reinforce the island by placing a few of his fighters there.  This would weaken Iwo's CAP if I can convince the move to happen.

Build-Up
Dan flies recon over Tokyo everyday and he must take serious note of nearly 200 Fighters flying CAP over Tokyo. 

My bomber concentration at Pagan and Saipan is done.  I still have some bombers to get to Tokyo before that side is ready. 

My fighters are working on the airframe shift from newer to older planes and should be prepped within 3 days.

I upgraded Shokaku and Zuikaku Torpedo Planes from Jill to Grace!  YUM!  New, excellent planes...



< Message edited by John 3rd -- 1/12/2009 7:33:06 PM >

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1385
RE: The Battle Totals--Part Three - 1/12/2009 7:38:06 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline 		For me it's 8/44, and I have pretty much stopped disbanding valuable ships in port. They will repair if they are in TF's DOCKED, but I don't disband them for that reason. Once B-29s can hit the home islands, you can't really use your repair shipyards if you don't want your ships hit like those CAs just were.

The B-29 is one of a few nails in the coffin of the IJN.

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1386
RE: The Battle Totals--Part Three - 1/12/2009 8:51:01 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		This will sound like a very stupid question.  Can ships repair when they are docked but not disbanded?

Q-Ball's comment regarding Repair Yards and B-29s is right on.  This is why I have expanded Cebu, Manila, and Soerabaja for serious repairs.

Tori Shima
June 15, 1944

For the troops of this barren rock, little has happened for the last 3-4 months.  They have a routine and like it very quiet.

That peace is shattered during the late-night hours when 45 Japanese Night Bombers spread their bombs all over the area.  The bombers hit nothing but do get the defender's attention.  What does cause damage is two waves of Japanese Helen that strike the base at 0830 and 1025 hours.

Wave One
164 Helen pound the AF and destroy 3 Recon and 10 Corsairs on the ground.  The AF is hit 121 times.

Wave Two
7 Zero and 57 Helen add to the carnage by destroying 4 more Recon, 1 Corsair, and nail the AF another 38 times.

These strikes should get the American's attention and they will happen again tomorrow.  Tomorrow's attack will also feature a Sentai of Tony or Tojo escorting the attackers just in case there are fighters up.  By hitting the atoll twice in a row I wager Dan will feel compelled to move Fighters to aid in its defense.

China
The Americans have staged their B-29 forward to Hengchow and Changsha.  I am gathering a force of 150 army bombers that will be escorted by 100 Fighters to hit one of these targets within the next day or two.  Perhaps a similar result can be achieved as at Tori Shima...



_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 1387
RE: The Battle Totals--Part Three - 1/12/2009 8:59:35 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Can ships repair when they are docked but not disbanded?


Yes they can. There was a thread a while back about a player using up most of his Repair Points to fix those docked and not those disbanded. He soon moved those just docked to another port.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1388
RE: The Battle Totals--Part Three - 1/12/2009 9:26:02 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		I did not KNOW that!  Consider it immediately done when I get the next turn from Dan.

Wake
The American Fleet has headed to Eniwetok and left the island defenders locked in fierce battle.  The Americans are crammed into small portions of the atoll while the Japanese maintain control of anything important.  Since the American Fleet's departure the Japanese have cleared their AF enough fro Transport planes to start arriving from Marcus.  These planes are flying in both supplies and the 8th Ind Brigade to bolster the defense.

While doing this they are also pulling out some of the Base Forces there for use elsewhere.

In another day or two the AF will be totally operational and there is some talk of restocking the base with a few Torpedo and Dive Bombers



_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 1389
RE: The Battle Totals--Part Three - 1/12/2009 10:31:19 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		How crazy would it be to ATTACK at Wake with my troops?  My disruption is down and I have nearly 1,500 fresh troops flown in from Marcus.  The AS strength appears to be equal at the moment.  I've got 9,000 in supply and no American warships nearby.

June 16, 1944

Tori Shima 
The base is hit again this day by a combined force of 36 Night Fighters (do they ever hit anything?), 65 Fighters, and 195 Bombers.  Another half-a-dozen or so planes are destroyed on the ground and the AF is further hit 75 times.  AF damage is now at 65%.

Amchitka
The few troops who still hold this base are awakening to a Heavy Cruiser's Bombardment.  As they scramble and dawn comes they spot several American troopships dropping their anchors and in comes an American RCT.

Imperial High Command, not wanting to look like it is UP TO SOMETHING orders a Chutai of Frances to fly up here and attack shipping directly around the island.  These 9 planes aren't much but perhaps they can do something.

Strategic Bombing
Aomori
YIKES!  From Shikuka comes 26 P-38, 137 4EB, and 136 B-29!  They fly in fairly low (9-12,000 Ft) and plaster over 200 Resources.

Iwo Jima
There hasn't been a raid from here since the 14th so I expect a raid tomorrow.  If that is the case then I will time Operation Shimakaze to occur after the following attack.





_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1390
Ouch... - 1/13/2009 4:47:25 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		A reality check appears NW of Wake...






Attachment (1)

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1391
RE: Ouch... - 1/13/2009 2:23:31 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Your three bases on Timor are very low on supply. Send some when you can. 

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1392
Trouble??? - 1/13/2009 4:48:20 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Operation Shimakaze
June 19, 1944

This is a game of gut feelings and operational patterns.  I have had to hold off launching my attack on Iwo Jima for about two days longer then I wanted to due to a lack of fuel at Saipan.  I now have that fuel unloading and managed to get nearly all my CV fully fueled on the 19th.  I should be able to sortie on the 20th to launch the attack.  All LBA--over 1,000 planes--are now in position and have been resting.

Things look ripe for the attack.

Unfortunately my antenna are twitching.  Several 'unconnected' events have taken place on the 18th and 19th:

1.  The CVs that shot down my bombers NW of Wake have disappeared.  I cannot believe this is possible when I have 54 Bombers and 18 Emily flying air search from Marcus but it is.  The force that shot down those Jills was formidable.  I would guess all his CV/CVL in the Central Pacific were present--probably 4 CV and 3-5 CVL.

2.  I had a Glen--SS get a whiff of something NE of Tokyo.  It spotted a TF but was shot down.  Don't know what it saw.  Odds are this was a CV TF if the Glen was shot down without giving any form of report.

3.  Biggest Tell is Dan just shifted his Operational pattern.  He should have flown his 4EB from Iwo yesterday but did not.  He SHOULD have flown them today.  He did not.  I think he senses with my Fleet move to Saipan that I am up to something and it doesn't take an idiot to guess where he is most vulnerable at the moment.

I am willing to wager he has stood down his 4EB and shifted them to Naval Search and Attack.  If you want me to QUIT this campaign them image is of 200 B-17/B-24/B29 on Naval Attack crushing my CVs with impunity.  I simply would quit the game at that point.  That is a fairly simple decision.  Therefore, I am going to hold for at least a day.

If he doesn't fly those 4EB then I know something is up.

With the Fleet fueled perhaps I can go someplace else and raise some Hell.  I am not wed to this plan if it means prohibitive losses.  I could also retire the Fleet to Soerabaja and do maintenance and Upgrades as well.  My warships are in desperate need of that.

Decisions:
1.  Ordered a Recon of Iwo to see what is going on.  His CAP should be a dead giveaway.
2.  Hold Operation Shimakaze for a day longer.
3.  Move 8 Glen-SS Around to see if anything is happening between Wake--Midway--Iwo
4.  Perhaps there is a supply convoy coming from Midway or the North Pacific that I could hit...

I'll know next turn.




_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 1393
RE: Trouble??? - 1/13/2009 6:17:36 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		Why this temerity?   Why not just steam in closer to Iwo with CAP at 100% and the decks full of fighters. let his bombers impale themselves on your CAP and then swap in some strikegroups and blast his warships to pieces as you drive by on Day 2. Finish off the cripples on Day 3 and then get out of dodge.

That should result in a lot of dead planes, lots of sunk ships and very little risk to KB.

Instead of slowing down speed up. If the situation is uncertain why slow down until such time as your opponent can make up his mind? Why not speed up and clarify the situation by grabbing your opponent by the throat and getting started on strangling him?

There's not much risk since even 7 CVs with half-fighters can put up something like 250 fighters and you don't have to launch the day 2 strikes unless the situation looks good. In addition most of your fighter pilots will be downed over your own TF so should be rescued.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1394
RE: Trouble??? - 1/13/2009 6:45:56 PM   
modrow

 

Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/27/2006
Status: offline 		John,

was repeatedly checking for this update today, but had hoped to read something else

Problem may have been the attacks on Tori Shima. It was a great idea to set up a ruse, but if he perceived a threat and felt he needs to reinforce there, it will mean bringing additional assets to the vicinity of your real target, reinforcing its defense or at least his possibilities to react immediately. In addition, is there a reason why he could think you might want to go after that base ? If not, he may have deduced this is a ruse. As he knows where KB was only few turns ago, he can probably figure possible alternative targets, which may be few of interest.

From the way I understand your post, the heavy bombers may go on naval attack in your game. Do you have an opportunity to run a few tests what may happen if a fighter-heavy KB goes toe to toe with a comparable number of (escorted) 4Es ? If they are impaling themselves on your CAP, Nemo's approach may be viable and even lead to better results than the op you were originally planning. But from hearsay in these forums my impression is that stopping such a naval attack may be very difficult.

Without the opportunity to test the possible outcome, I would most likely abandon this op... or rather postpone it until your opponent thinks there was no real danger and returns to his old schedule...

As always, just my 2 cts.

Hartwig


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1395
RE: Trouble??? - 1/13/2009 7:13:40 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Combat Report
June 20, 1944

I was right!  Everyone falls into operational patterns.

Tori Shima
My Bombing milk runs and training program continue with the base being hit by 42 Night Bombers, 88 Helens, 49 Fighters and 27 Jills.

Iwo Jima Area 
He doubled his CAP over Iwo Jima and flung his 4EB at Saipan. 

My Glen-SS picked up what appears to be the Northern portion of his CV Fleet only about 8 hexes from Iwo Jima.  If I had sent my CVs to the east from which to strike then they would have been crushed.  

Saipan
Thank God my CVs were formed up and all he hit were 2 DD, 3 CL, and 1 CA.  None are in sinking condition.  He attacked with 56 P-38 and 124 4EB against 48 Fighters.  I lose 26 Fighters for 1 P-38 and 1 Liberator (12 Damaged).

KB
I order the KB to drop back a few hexes so it is 3 hexes west of Saipan.

Operation Shimakaze
We shall wait one day.  My CVs can still attack and my LBA is ready.  Simply put--I will not sacrifice 2-300 planes for a futile mission.

Hartwig
I concur with your opinion.  The Japanese don't HAVE to attack.  Will wait and see the developments.  The AF is only so big.  My fear is that he decides to leave 6 CVE disbanded in the non-existent port so they add their Hellcats to the CAP.  We'll hope he doesn't do that.   

You are porbably correct in the assertion that Tori Shima tipped my hand.  I THOUGHT he would hunker down.  NOT call for immediate reinforcements.  My serious mistake.

Nemo
I ALWAYS value your insight but this time you're way off.  A strike of 60 P-38 and 122 4EB would obliterate my CAP and plaster at least one CV TF.  YOu must remember that these Figthers are well trained.  Most are in their 60s and only a few are in their 70s.  My CV DB and TB are solidly prepared but my Fighters stink.  There is no point in taking losses when I don't HAVE TO!

Counter in China
Hengchow
In a surprise move I launch 70 Tony (Escorts), 54 Fighters (Training AF Attack) and 102 Bombers at the Bombers Field in Wenchow.  Only 12 Spitfire fly CAP and 9 are shot down.  My Bombers and Fighters leisurely bomb the AF destroying in-the-air and on-the-ground 11 Spitfire, 9 P-39, 9 Liberators, and 2 P-51.  Damaged the AF with 130 hits.

Shanghai
My Fighters fall back to Shanghai and join the CAP there for a couple of days.

Takao
The Bombers retire here to rerst and replenish.

I am going to hit-and-fade in China going after his Bomber Fields about 1/Week.  Anything that occupies him and forces him to divert resources is a positive for Japan.



_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 1396
Turn Hiatus - 1/13/2009 7:14:58 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		I am taking my dad out to see an afternoon movie so there won't be another turn fro Dan and I until this evening.  Just wanted to let people know so they don't panic and click the 'refresh' button TOO many times!

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1397
RE: Turn Hiatus - 1/13/2009 7:46:30 PM   
modrow

 

Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/27/2006
Status: offline 		Hi John,

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I am taking my dad out to see an afternoon movie so there won't be another turn fro Dan and I until this evening.  Just wanted to let people know so they don't panic and click the 'refresh' button TOO many times!


LOL ! Actually, as the steam is out of this operation for now, I probably won't... Have a great time with your dad (I meet my dad too rarely, fortunately he has a rowdy bunch of friends who make up for this deficit) !

By the way: In a way, at the time being you reach the goal this operation had - stop strategic bombing from Iwo. Possibly, the attack on those cruisers can be interpreted as "there really is something out there". Is there a "cheap" way to make Dan feel he has to leave his LBA @ IWO on naval attack for some extended time (for refit and upgrades of KB, e.g.)?

Re. disbanding CVEs - not sure whether he will do so. I mean, you just demonstrated that his convois need extra protection. Thus, if he uses many of his CV and CVE to cover Iwo, fine - then he cannot protect his convois well. I don't have a count of the number of CVE he has available and in this theater, but presently he really cannot be everywhere he ought to be.

Hartwig

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1398
RE: Trouble??? - 1/13/2009 9:54:45 PM   
modrow

 

Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/27/2006
Status: offline 		John,

I'm back after a bit of testing... If you are interested, pm me for the file.

As I run vanilla stock, I used the tutorial scenario; trained the lousy exp zekes by port attacks and loaded all Japanese CV/CVL in that scenario with them, leaving strike components behind - yielding 280 Zekes on 100%LRCAP over the TF; Exp varying between 80 and 55 with the majority between 55 and 65.

The results seem to show that Nemo was not really way off.

200 exp 60 Superforts at 11k without escort did not break through that CAP (at least when height of incoming bombers and CAP was matched, I did not vary too much there.

I then started to add Hellcats to the mix (exp 80). 40 Hellcats+200 Superforts still don't break that CAP. At about 60 Hellcats bombers start penetrating. Thus for the assumed numbers of attackers provided, I think he was not wrong about the results.

Interesting.

Hartwig

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1399
RE: Trouble??? - 1/13/2009 10:32:10 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		John,

I'll explain a little as to why I'm not off in this which I think will help people and also shed a little light into how the combat algorithm works.

Firstly let's identify what the KEY component here is.... It is NOT fighter quality but, rather, defending fighter QUANTITY. Why is this?

1. Attacking fighters will ESCORT the enemy bombers and this means that they have a MUCH smaller number of firing passes per fighter at your fighters and those firing passes tend to occur at a disadvantage relative to your fighters. All this means that 60 P-38s on escort will kill far, far fewer of your fighters than those same P-38s would on SWEEP or on CAP over their own CVs.

2. What determines fighter on fighter kills is the relative stance of the planes ( LRCAP vs sweep or escort vs CAP etc ), the number of firing passes per plane and the quality of those firing passes ( quality being determined by all the advantages one side has over the other including plane and pilot characteristics ). With fighters the better fighter and better pilot tend to do pretty well even in spite of numbers due to the high number of firing passes per plane in-game ( although this tendency is lessened when escorting ).

What determines bomber kills is MUCH more the number of passes than the quality of those passes as the quality differential between ANY bomber and almost any fighter is already so massive. Sure there are some outliers ( planes armed with 2 x 7.7mm MGs vs massive B-29s etc ) BUT for most cannon-armed fighters vs most bombers once the plane makes a firing pass it has a reasonable chance of getting a kill whether that's a 60 Exp or 80 Exp pilot.


So, overall, you'd take far less losses to P-38s than you'd think if you mounted a FULL CAP and I think you'd down more B-29s ( or whatever ) than you think.


I've run late-war tests on this and had KB CAP from 8 CVs mounting about 350 fighters which was "proof" against 100 fighters and 350 four-engined bombers ( a reasonable strike from a Level 9 airfield ) . Sure, some bombers got through but there were very few, they were very disrupted and they didn't render any CVs incapable of further action. That's pretty much a worst-case scenario right there.

I doubt you'd be facing anything close to that so so long as you have enough fighters over your CVs you should be able to butcher those bombers. The key is filling the air with defending fighters even if they are only 50 or 60 Exp.


I routinely send hordes of ultra-low quality fighters as escort for my strikes with a view to "absorbing" high quality firing passes with low quality planes and pilots and thus, overall, getting a greater percentage of my strikegroups through. The obverse also works.

but, each to their own and all that.

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 1400
RE: Trouble??? - 1/14/2009 12:08:58 AM   
Kereguelen


Posts: 1829
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

I've run late-war tests on this and had KB CAP from 8 CVs mounting about 350 fighters which was "proof" against 100 fighters and 350 four-engined bombers ( a reasonable strike from a Level 9 airfield ) . Sure, some bombers got through but there were very few, they were very disrupted and they didn't render any CVs incapable of further action. That's pretty much a worst-case scenario right there.

I doubt you'd be facing anything close to that so so long as you have enough fighters over your CVs you should be able to butcher those bombers. The key is filling the air with defending fighters even if they are only 50 or 60 Exp.



Have thrashed KB (under heavy CAP umbrella) in late-war (PBEM; game was in 1943; vanilla) game with a far lower number of Allied planes attacking (combination of P-38 fighters, B-25 bombers and some B-24's). The key was having highly experienced Allied pilots in the airgroups. It were the B-25's (XP 85+) that killed the Japanese carriers, btw. KB is by now means "proof" when coming into range of experienced land based Allied air groups.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1401
RE: Trouble??? - 1/14/2009 3:57:52 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Thanks guys.  I am going to see what Dan chooses to do. 

Nemo I will think about what you have said.  I have simply never thought of this game in such a 'technical' manner before.

The bottom line is that I can do this sort of an operation whenever I want to.  I only have the KB left as any form of deterrent for keeping Dan honest within the game. 

I think all he is seeing is Victory Points while I'm fighting to survive as Japan.  This is a very different mindset.  There is the very real probability that Dan will not even try to land on another island.  If that is the case then what is the point.  He can bomb Japan into oblivion over time.  Only thing I can do is make the bombing so costly that he feels like he must have more bases.  Issue with that is he'll probably use China even more then he is right now for the B-29s.  Guess I'm saying what is the point?

Hmmm....

SUBJECT CHANGE:  The film Father and I went to see was Valkyrie.  I went in dreading the film.  As a Historian by trade I hate Hollywood and movies.  They can be very good (Gettysburg/Glory/Saving Private Ryan) or terrible (PEARL HARBOR).  This film had been panned by reviewers but I have to admit that I was truly engaged by the story and the whole July 20th Bomb Plot.  Have to admit my knowledge is not very deep here but I truly thought the film had some fine moments.

Since this is my own AAR, I will happily permit it to be hijacked for film discussion and/or review.




_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 1402
RE: Trouble??? - 1/14/2009 5:32:56 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Operation Shimakaze
June 22, 1944

The "Attack" Order is given by Combined Fleet at 1800 hours on June 21st. If all goes well a force of nearly 1,500 planes will descend on Iwo Jima tomorrow PRIOR to a massive relief Fleet arriving on scene. Everything will be attacked: the AF, Impossible-to-have Port, and Task Forces surrounding the atoll.

This is how it lays out:






Attachment (1)

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1403
RE: Trouble??? - 1/14/2009 11:20:38 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		[color="#000000" size="3"]"Morituri te salutamus"

Good Luck.


_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1404
RE: Trouble??? - 1/14/2009 1:50:23 PM   
modrow

 

Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/27/2006
Status: offline 		Nemo,

thanks for your sharing your insight. Your suggestion made me start a series of tests which are quite instructive...

I got another question for you related to this. In my series of tests, this is a typical result for a break through CAP (by now allied bombers are trained to about 70, exp of other planes as in the tests mentioned above, i.e. no brilliant fighter pilots for IJN).


TEST RESULT * NOT FROM JOHN'S GAME


A6M5 Zeke x 289

Allied aircraft
F6F Hellcat x 102
B-25J Mitchell x 33
PB4Y Liberator x 11
B-24J Liberator x 32
B-29 Superfortress x 164

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zeke: 172 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F6F Hellcat: 84 destroyed
B-25J Mitchell: 11 destroyed, 11 damaged
PB4Y Liberator: 1 destroyed
B-24J Liberator: 2 destroyed, 9 damaged
B-29 Superfortress: 7 destroyed, 40 damaged

Allied morale was high, so only few planes turned back. When I saw after a2a about 120 Superforts, 30 Liberators and 20 Mitchells remaining to drop bombs, I was sure KB would be toast. Here's what these 170 level 70 exp bombers did achieve:

Japanese Ships
CVL Zuiho, Bomb hits 2
BB Haruna, Bomb hits 2
CVL Ryuho, Bomb hits 9, on fire, heavy damage
CV Zuikaku, Bomb hits 7, on fire
BB Kongo, Bomb hits 1
BB Musashi, Bomb hits 1
CV Taiho, Bomb hits 3
CA Tone
CA Chikuma

Ryuho is looking bad, but the rest of the ships is fine...

Now my question: In view of these results, it looks to me there must be a feedback mechanism affecting the precision of bombing. This may also explain why high EXP bombers are deadly even against strong CAP - the reduction is not sufficiently strong to make hits a rare thing to occur. Do you know how that feedback works ? You talk about disruption, how is that factored in ?

Thanks

Hartwig

< Message edited by hartwig.modrow -- 1/14/2009 1:55:23 PM >

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1405
RE: Trouble??? - 1/14/2009 4:01:30 PM   
pat.casey

 

Posts: 393
Joined: 9/10/2007
Status: offline 		My prediction:

IWO gets plastered, but so does KB.

Definately going to be a fun one.

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 1406
RE: Trouble??? - 1/14/2009 4:33:11 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		I do not describe that as fun.  We shall see what happens.  Since Dan launched those 4EB on the 20th with nothing happening on the 21st I hope he flings them somewhere else this turn.  With his CV approaching perhaps he will get a little over-confident.

The hope is for a 4EB strike at one of the 3 AF that have been plastering Tori Shima.  I launched the biggest raid yet on that poor base June 21st.  The island was crushed by 35 Night Bombers, 300 Army Bombers, and 150 Fighters.  Have to admit the six days worth of strikes have helped with my Fighters state of experience!

The Kaigun will approach to five hexes distance and attack.  The CAP is set at 60% which should yield roughly 225 Zero flying over the CVs.  CV Deployment is the same as my Raid:

KB-1  Akagi, Kaga, Ryujo
KB-2  Shokaku, Zuikaku, Chitose
KB-3  Amagi, Unryu, Zuiho
KB-4  Taiho, Ryuho, Shoho

I can only hope my suicide and diversion TF draw some Allied fire from the CVs. 

Regardless the die is cast and mission is running.  We're waiting on the turn coming back.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to pat.casey)
Post #: 1407
RE: Trouble??? - 1/14/2009 5:23:38 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		Guys, well there's no certainty in war. There is, at best, probability.

Hartwig, I would find 1/3rd Hellcat to be quite a bit of overmatch for that many A6M5s. By the time that many A6M5s are downed there are few firing passes left for the bombers. In addition in reality it is unlikely that any bombers would be so fresh and with such high morale.

I think that also you should try to make sure the Japanese mount 350 fighters as CAP. 290 fighters ON CAP is a lot weaker than 350 in these circumstances as the number of fighters which get through to the bombers is going to be "Total CAP - those killed by fighters". So, if fighters kill 150 A6M5s then you get 140 fighters going for the bombers when 290 are on CAP. When 350 are on CAP you get 200 breaking into the bomber streams which is a 50% increase in "quality passes on bombers" for only a 16% increase in total CAP.

50% more fighters would disrupt those bombers a lot more.


In addition my tests were conducted with bombers with some fatigue etc etc and non-perfect morale so I'm sure I generated a lot of "turning back".

Lastly I can confirm that any fighter interception acts to degrade the accuracy of bombing such that it is worthwhile intercepting even if the fighters shoot little down.


So, if you run this again with no better than 70 morale ( which I consider quite normal for a group in combat ) and with fatigue for about 1/2 the bombers at 25% ( to represent flying in for the strike etc ) AND you up the A6M5 numbers to 350 then I think:
a) you'll see far more fighters get through to the bombers and
b) you'll see far, far fewer bombers get through.

Sure, your CVs will still suffer a few hits but if only 50 disrupted bombers get through your fleet should really survive with only minor damage. Certainly nothing approaching the death and destruction most would expect.


This can be expressed as an equation if you're interested - that might be more illustrative even if the relative weighting of factors needs to be determined.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1408
Operation Shimakzae - 1/14/2009 5:37:53 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Operation Shimakaze
June 22, 1944

Before I even start I must state that I have asked Dan for a mulligan on this turn.

Everyone has seen the plan as detailed above.  It worked out quite well with two exceptions:

1.  Tokyo's missions were all cancelled due to weather.  OK.  I accept that without issue.
2.  Had a smaller force at Tsu (150 planes) not fly but that isn't a big deal.
3.  Pagan Strike Flew as planned and did OK.  WOW--US AA is NASTY over AF!
4.  Saipan Strike flew as planned and hit shipping as well as AF.
5.  KB flew NOTHING! 

For some stupid reason they didn't launch a single aircraft.  I checked after watching and saw they moved only FOUR hexes instead of FIVE!  Fuel was fine with the CVs but Akagi/Kaga decided to F#&%@($ refuel for no apparent reason.  Dammit I hate this game!

We'll see what Dan says and I will get back to you. 


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1409
RE: Trouble??? - 1/14/2009 6:31:31 PM   
modrow

 

Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/27/2006
Status: offline 		John,

sorry to hijack your thread by this discussion with Nemo. I hope that being an educator you understand – I am learning a lot right now.


Nemo,

I am aware I put too much load on the CAP – I slowly increased it in my (still incomplete) series of test. If you take 50 +/- 10 Hellcats, you get virtually no penetration and quite some amount of bomber losses – nasty results for the Allied rather than disaster for IJN. I can only confirm that based on the tests I did run you don’t see anything close to the death and destruction one might –and I did- expect.

The interesting issue for me to see was that even under almost “perfect” conditions for the attackers re. morale and fatigue and even if a large number of bombers penetrates without being damaged, they do not perform well. This is interesting, as it allows for some buffer in case you calculated with a CAP of 60 and get 90...

This observation seems to indicate that the A2A model has a significant influence on the bombing model.

So far, I was aware that generally higher numbers lead to nonlinear effects in the A2A model (though I had never worked with such a massive CAP before, so I was astonished to see how hard this nonlinear effect strikes if high numbers of planes are involved) and that the presence of CAP adds disruption for the bombers.

I had expected the effectiveness of the bombing to be dependent on the ratio of damaged and killed bombers relative to the strike package only, assuming that morale drop and similar side effects would be only correlated to this entity.

Instead, here, you get a big deterioration of bombing efficiency even though the bombers were not harmed that much. That is very surprising to me, and I would like to understand it better.

If you can provide a formula, this would be great – I am very interested. Math is much more efficient than language to express these things…

Thanks again – as mentioned above, I am just learning a lot !

Hartwig

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1410
Page:   <<   < prev  45 46 [47] 48 49   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: A Thought... Page: <<   < prev  45 46 [47] 48 49   next >   >>
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

0.738