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 few newbie questions

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: A few newbie questions Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A few newbie questions - 1/23/2011 1:48:05 AM   
brian800000

 

Posts: 225
Joined: 9/15/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: brian800000


quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

BTW, the issue with planes not attacking troops in a hex you own has been fixed.  It was a bug.  It should be in the next beta release.  I don't think it's in the one that is currently up.

Bill



Is there also possibly a bug with ACMs? I thought that they keep your mines from going under 150 if disbanded in a port, but mine are still eroding.



The section says: "6.6.1.2.2 MINEFIELD TENDERS.
A special class of ships, Minefield Tenders (ACM type) reduces the decay rate of minefields at
bases. Each ACM can protect (i.e. service and repair) 150 mines from decay."

Reduces, not prevents. There are still randoms involved I believe. ACMs give a lower chance of decay/better chance of a good random.


Makes sense. I just checked a save game against my current game. There were 6 (and later 7) ACMs at Pearl Harbor for the period, and 1 ACM at Port Moresby.

At Pearl Harbor, there were 321 mines on 2/9, and as of 2/19 there were still 321.

At Port Moresby, there were 98 mines on 2/9, but only 93 mines on 2/9.

So at Port Moresby I was getting some benefit, but not a very good one.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 331
RE: A few newbie questions - 1/24/2011 7:24:01 AM   
CaptDave

 

Posts: 659
Joined: 6/21/2002
From: Federal Way, WA
Status: offline
You can't move from Singapore to JB because the Japanese own the hex side. No movement is allowed across a hex side owned by the enemy. Note, though, that each hex side really has two sides, and it's the side moved INTO that matters. You can follow them into Singapore, but you can't go back out. (Manual, section 8.3.1.2, p 191.)

Of course, this assumes they moved in via land, as usual, rather than by amphibious landing...

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 332
RE: A few newbie questions - 1/29/2011 2:42:13 AM   
brian800000

 

Posts: 225
Joined: 9/15/2010
Status: offline
After a hiatus, a few more questions...

1) Closing in on 3 months of the war, my Catalinas have been undergoing a slaughter. I've lost 66 to op losses alone. Although I've adjusted this at different geographies, I've been putting them on 50% search, 20% training. I've been increasing them to the max number of pilots and decreasing the maximum range by a couple. Am I doing something wrong?

2) The "Reserve" mode seems to be great for recovering from fatigue and disruption, but it doesn't seem to be speeding the repair of disabled devices. Is this a correct theory?

(in reply to CaptDave)
Post #: 333
RE: A few newbie questions - 1/29/2011 5:01:50 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
1)  Losses due to damaged planes crashing are counted as ops losses.  Are your Catalinas being lost at the same rate in safe places like the west coast as they are in combat zones?  You should see the losses in combat zones be higher as they get shot up by CAP and flak and are lost on the way home or crash on landing.

2) You should put them in Rest mode to recover.  They should repair a bit quicker that way too, though there are other factors like still being in combat, malaria zones, etc.

Bill


_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to brian800000)
Post #: 334
RE: A few newbie questions - 1/29/2011 1:20:14 PM   
brian800000

 

Posts: 225
Joined: 9/15/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

1)  Losses due to damaged planes crashing are counted as ops losses.  Are your Catalinas being lost at the same rate in safe places like the west coast as they are in combat zones?  You should see the losses in combat zones be higher as they get shot up by CAP and flak and are lost on the way home or crash on landing.

2) You should put them in Rest mode to recover.  They should repair a bit quicker that way too, though there are other factors like still being in combat, malaria zones, etc.

Bill



Thanks for the reply.

In regards to #1, the west coast units are crashing quite a bit as well. A few squadrons are closing in on 50% op losses in less than 3 months.

In regards to #2, I'm referring to units for which rest mode isn't an option. For example, those at Singapore while it is under siege. What is best to do with those units? (I'm not discussing those that are completely ineffective that should be evacuated, but those that are perhaps 60/90, that could be much better with repairs but are still useful in their current state).

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 335
RE: A few newbie questions - 1/31/2011 3:36:04 AM   
brian800000

 

Posts: 225
Joined: 9/15/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian800000


quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

1)  Losses due to damaged planes crashing are counted as ops losses.  Are your Catalinas being lost at the same rate in safe places like the west coast as they are in combat zones?  You should see the losses in combat zones be higher as they get shot up by CAP and flak and are lost on the way home or crash on landing.

2) You should put them in Rest mode to recover.  They should repair a bit quicker that way too, though there are other factors like still being in combat, malaria zones, etc.

Bill



Thanks for the reply.

In regards to #1, the west coast units are crashing quite a bit as well. A few squadrons are closing in on 50% op losses in less than 3 months.

In regards to #2, I'm referring to units for which rest mode isn't an option. For example, those at Singapore while it is under siege. What is best to do with those units? (I'm not discussing those that are completely ineffective that should be evacuated, but those that are perhaps 60/90, that could be much better with repairs but are still useful in their current state).



I think I discovered the answer to #1. I was setting the range by first going to the max, and then reducing a couple of hexes. For example, if the maximum range was 20, I was searching at 18. Unfortunately for my pilots, normal range tended to be 16. I've set all my patrols back to the normal range, with a few exceptions. Hopefully being a patrol pilot won't be the most dangerous job in the war any longer.

(in reply to brian800000)
Post #: 336
RE: A few newbie questions - 1/31/2011 10:40:28 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian800000


quote:

ORIGINAL: brian800000


quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

1)  Losses due to damaged planes crashing are counted as ops losses.  Are your Catalinas being lost at the same rate in safe places like the west coast as they are in combat zones?  You should see the losses in combat zones be higher as they get shot up by CAP and flak and are lost on the way home or crash on landing.

2) You should put them in Rest mode to recover.  They should repair a bit quicker that way too, though there are other factors like still being in combat, malaria zones, etc.

Bill



Thanks for the reply.

In regards to #1, the west coast units are crashing quite a bit as well. A few squadrons are closing in on 50% op losses in less than 3 months.

In regards to #2, I'm referring to units for which rest mode isn't an option. For example, those at Singapore while it is under siege. What is best to do with those units? (I'm not discussing those that are completely ineffective that should be evacuated, but those that are perhaps 60/90, that could be much better with repairs but are still useful in their current state).



I think I discovered the answer to #1. I was setting the range by first going to the max, and then reducing a couple of hexes. For example, if the maximum range was 20, I was searching at 18. Unfortunately for my pilots, normal range tended to be 16. I've set all my patrols back to the normal range, with a few exceptions. Hopefully being a patrol pilot won't be the most dangerous job in the war any longer.



That is still too far. Anything beyond 12 hexes is going to be iffy regarding actually spotting anything, and even 12 hexes is more than the range listed on page 217 of the manual.

The longer the search range the higher the fatigue and ultimately the greater the potentail for operational losses. At a range of 16 the marginal return IMO is not worth it.

Operational losses are also greatly affected by pilot (in)experience.

Alfred

(in reply to brian800000)
Post #: 337
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/1/2011 2:52:40 AM   
brian800000

 

Posts: 225
Joined: 9/15/2010
Status: offline
That is very bad news for my pilots because I'm not going to reduce their searches that far! Maybe they are no longer effective at those ranges but it gives me peace of mind having the illusion that they are. It takes a range of about 16 to keep a carrier task force traveling at normal speed to keep from sneaking up on you in one turn. And those tend to be large fleets that I think should be spotted more easily.

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 338
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/1/2011 12:54:49 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline
Assign 20% of the squadron to rest and their fatigue level and operational losses should reduce.  I do that and have now built up quite a surplus of patrol planes (early '44).

(in reply to brian800000)
Post #: 339
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/1/2011 2:52:39 PM   
brian800000

 

Posts: 225
Joined: 9/15/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Assign 20% of the squadron to rest and their fatigue level and operational losses should reduce.  I do that and have now built up quite a surplus of patrol planes (early '44).


When I put the sqadrons on 50% search, what are they doing with the other 50% of their time? I assumed it was basically rest.

(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 340
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/1/2011 4:58:53 PM   
USSAmerica


Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Graham, NC, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian800000


quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Assign 20% of the squadron to rest and their fatigue level and operational losses should reduce.  I do that and have now built up quite a surplus of patrol planes (early '44).


When I put the sqadrons on 50% search, what are they doing with the other 50% of their time? I assumed it was basically rest.


Unless you specify a percentage to rest, the remaining pilots/planes are on standby to launch what ever primary mission type you have selected for the squadron. Even if that mission is Naval Search and you set 50% to Search, the other 50% are not stood down, and sleeping, etc, but are "ready" to launch. There is much more benefit for reducing fatigue and morale problems if you specifically order a percentage to rest.

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me


Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to brian800000)
Post #: 341
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/1/2011 6:09:36 PM   
henry1611

 

Posts: 66
Joined: 1/21/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: USS America

Unless you specify a percentage to rest, the remaining pilots/planes are on standby to launch what ever primary mission type you have selected for the squadron. Even if that mission is Naval Search and you set 50% to Search, the other 50% are not stood down, and sleeping, etc, but are "ready" to launch. There is much more benefit for reducing fatigue and morale problems if you specifically order a percentage to rest.



This is the approach I have used in the past, and the approach that would seem to make the most sense. However, with this approach I have not seen the number of missions spread evenly among the pilots.

Take a squadron with a Training mission set at 30% Train/70% Rest over several turns. In my experience, the 30% of pilots who flew the mission on the first turn are largely the same 30% of pilots who fly missions on subsequent turns. The majority of the remaining pilots (i.e., those who rested on the first turn) do not fly missions on subsequent turns. I do not see an even spread of missions among all of the pilots over several turns. Some pilots fly 12 missions, while other pilots fly 0 missions.

Recently, I have started to set the squadron at 30% Train while leaving the other patrol levels at 0%. With that setting, I have seen all of the pilots rotate through flying missions. The number of missions, experience increase and fatigue seem to be spread more evenly among the pilots with this approach.

I have not done an in-depth study of this by any means, so I can't say with certainty that this is the result for all percentage settings or all types of missions. It is just what I have seen, especially on Training, Naval Search, ASW and CAP missions.

I use "Rest" to limit the number of pilots/planes that will fly a mission on a particular turn. If I want a naval strike by only half the squadron and I want the remaining half to not fly at all, I will set the squadron at 50% Rest.

Has anyone else used this approach or should I go back to setting the squadron to at least some percentage of rest?

(in reply to USSAmerica)
Post #: 342
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/1/2011 11:10:52 PM   
inqistor


Posts: 1813
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brian800000
In regards to #1, the west coast units are crashing quite a bit as well. A few squadrons are closing in on 50% op losses in less than 3 months.


Extended range is the problem. I do not think normal mission range can have great impact. Not, when you actually not fighting at that distance.

quote:

In regards to #2, I'm referring to units for which rest mode isn't an option. For example, those at Singapore while it is under siege. What is best to do with those units? (I'm not discussing those that are completely ineffective that should be evacuated, but those that are perhaps 60/90, that could be much better with repairs but are still useful in their current state).


Not much you can do. Putting them in reserve will keep them from being targeted. But with enemy presence repairs are slow.

(in reply to brian800000)
Post #: 343
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/2/2011 12:32:28 AM   
brian800000

 

Posts: 225
Joined: 9/15/2010
Status: offline
This is good stuff. Thanks everybody.

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 344
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/2/2011 2:03:56 AM   
Mac Linehan

 

Posts: 1484
Joined: 12/19/2004
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline
quote:

That is still too far. Anything beyond 12 hexes is going to be iffy regarding actually spotting anything, and even 12 hexes is more than the range listed on page 217 of the manual.

The longer the search range the higher the fatigue and ultimately the greater the potentail for operational losses. At a range of 16 the marginal return IMO is not worth it.

Operational losses are also greatly affected by pilot (in)experience.

Alfred



USS America:

Unless you specify a percentage to rest, the remaining pilots/planes are on standby to launch what ever primary mission type you have selected for the squadron. Even if that mission is Naval Search and you set 50% to Search, the other 50% are not stood down, and sleeping, etc, but are "ready" to launch. There is much more benefit for reducing fatigue and morale problems if you specifically order a percentage to rest.



Alfred, USS America:

very useful clarifications. I incorrectly assumed that non assigned percentages were resting.
Thank You.

Mac



< Message edited by Mac Linehan -- 2/2/2011 2:08:48 AM >


_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 345
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/2/2011 12:03:14 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
So earlier I was discouraged from having units on 30 CAP and 30 train, for the purpose of defending bases where attack is possible but less likely while building up the pilot experience. (I did change most to full train, then got hit by a Nell attack on two transports and lost half a base force. This is in Akyab and the Nells are in Tavoy).

Is splitting between any task (like CAP or Search) and training bad in any way? Do they perform less well, or get more fatigue or ops losses? Seems like this would be a good idea for those in between units, almost trained up, and in between bases, close enough to attack but not within any fighter range.

As for patrols in less frequented areas, seems like you could have them training for other tasks, like ASW, while on 30 or 50 search. So something like 40 search, 30 train ASW, 30 rest. Would this cause any problems?

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Mac Linehan)
Post #: 346
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/6/2011 1:17:49 PM   
brian800000

 

Posts: 225
Joined: 9/15/2010
Status: offline
I had put a regiment, defense battalion, and CD unit at Canton so that it was at a little over 5,000 men. Enough supplies were there so that it wasn't practical to wipe them out. The Japanese attacked it with a large carrier fleet and landed quite a few troops, but the invasion was quickly defeated.

So the question comes up: if an enemy puts close to 6k of combat troops on an atoll, is it effectively impossible to take? If not, how do you do it?

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 347
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/6/2011 2:44:03 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian800000

I had put a regiment, defense battalion, and CD unit at Canton so that it was at a little over 5,000 men. Enough supplies were there so that it wasn't practical to wipe them out. The Japanese attacked it with a large carrier fleet and landed quite a few troops, but the invasion was quickly defeated.

So the question comes up: if an enemy puts close to 6k of combat troops on an atoll, is it effectively impossible to take? If not, how do you do it?


A 6k garrison is roughly only 200 AV. Thus barring fortification levels and disruption, a division would suffice. To be on the safe side, a 2 division assault will defeat the 6k garrison.

Alfred

(in reply to brian800000)
Post #: 348
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/6/2011 4:20:58 PM   
USSAmerica


Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Graham, NC, USA
Status: offline
Yes, Brian, an attacker can bring as many troops as he can carry to an atoll invasion.  He lands, kicks butt as quickly as he can, and then reloads as quickly as he can, leaving behind a garrison under the stacking limit.  This limits his severe supply burn penalty for overstacking to just a few turns. 

In general, atolls are very expensive to attack and take when well defended, but almost impossible to defend if the attacker decides to pay the extra supply costs for a few turns to bring a few divisions to the party. 


_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me


Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 349
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/7/2011 3:10:21 AM   
brian800000

 

Posts: 225
Joined: 9/15/2010
Status: offline
Another question: I've trained a number of medium bombers for naval attack, and they are bombing at 7k. They are up to 60+ in naval bombing skill, and to date they have been highly effective in making huge splashes around enemy ships. Less effective at hitting them.

Have I done something wrong, had bad luck, or are level bombers from 7k just worthless on naval attack?

(in reply to USSAmerica)
Post #: 350
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/7/2011 3:15:22 AM   
brian800000

 

Posts: 225
Joined: 9/15/2010
Status: offline
Believe it or not, another question.

Before attacking a base, how do you get a sense of what is there? I'm about to land a couple of Aussie Divisions on Luganville, and have been sending a B17 group as recon to give me a heads up on what is there. I still don't have a good handle on it. But when I eventually want to attack the Marianas or the Marshall Islands, you can't send recon planes. Is there a way to get a sense of what is there besides the random SigInt report, or do you just make a guess and find out when your guys land on shore?

(in reply to brian800000)
Post #: 351
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/7/2011 3:51:19 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian800000

Believe it or not, another question.

Before attacking a base, how do you get a sense of what is there? I'm about to land a couple of Aussie Divisions on Luganville, and have been sending a B17 group as recon to give me a heads up on what is there. I still don't have a good handle on it. But when I eventually want to attack the Marianas or the Marshall Islands, you can't send recon planes. Is there a way to get a sense of what is there besides the random SigInt report, or do you just make a guess and find out when your guys land on shore?


By the time you're ready to invade the Marianas you'll have recon planes with a range of 32, which can base from Eniwetok.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to brian800000)
Post #: 352
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/7/2011 4:17:16 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
You can also train some carrier units to do recon.  There are some recon versions of navy fighters that are carrier capable.  I know the F6F-3P is.

Bill


_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 353
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/7/2011 4:40:41 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian800000

Another question: I've trained a number of medium bombers for naval attack, and they are bombing at 7k. They are up to 60+ in naval bombing skill, and to date they have been highly effective in making huge splashes around enemy ships. Less effective at hitting them.

Have I done something wrong, had bad luck, or are level bombers from 7k just worthless on naval attack?


Most people around here do use their medium bombers on naval attack. I personally think it is a misallocation of resources. If well trained in naval attack skill and operating from a low enough altitude they will get some hits but not enough to make it really worthwhile. Concentrate medium bombers on land targets, sea targets should be primarily reserved to dive and torpedo bombers (or other plane types capable of laucning a torpedo).

To get a good feel for the effectiveness of any particular tactic or strategy, you would be well rewarded in reading various AARs rather than just asking these sorts of questions out of context in this thread. AARs provide the necessary context to properly appraise your own performance and to understand why some things work better under some circumstances and not others.

Alfred

(in reply to brian800000)
Post #: 354
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/7/2011 7:15:49 AM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: brian800000

Another question: I've trained a number of medium bombers for naval attack, and they are bombing at 7k. They are up to 60+ in naval bombing skill, and to date they have been highly effective in making huge splashes around enemy ships. Less effective at hitting them.

Have I done something wrong, had bad luck, or are level bombers from 7k just worthless on naval attack?


Most people around here do use their medium bombers on naval attack. I personally think it is a misallocation of resources. If well trained in naval attack skill and operating from a low enough altitude they will get some hits but not enough to make it really worthwhile. Concentrate medium bombers on land targets, sea targets should be primarily reserved to dive and torpedo bombers (or other plane types capable of laucning a torpedo).

To get a good feel for the effectiveness of any particular tactic or strategy, you would be well rewarded in reading various AARs rather than just asking these sorts of questions out of context in this thread. AARs provide the necessary context to properly appraise your own performance and to understand why some things work better under some circumstances and not others.

Alfred


MBs are useful in both roles, although I disagree that DB/TB can take over the same roles that a naval attack trained medium bomber
squad.

Range makes a real difference. If your mission is naval denial, deterrence or ASW, a good anti shipping medium bomber squad simply can
cover more territory.

_____________________________


(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 355
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/7/2011 7:57:04 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: brian800000

Another question: I've trained a number of medium bombers for naval attack, and they are bombing at 7k. They are up to 60+ in naval bombing skill, and to date they have been highly effective in making huge splashes around enemy ships. Less effective at hitting them.

Have I done something wrong, had bad luck, or are level bombers from 7k just worthless on naval attack?


Most people around here do use their medium bombers on naval attack. I personally think it is a misallocation of resources. If well trained in naval attack skill and operating from a low enough altitude they will get some hits but not enough to make it really worthwhile. Concentrate medium bombers on land targets, sea targets should be primarily reserved to dive and torpedo bombers (or other plane types capable of laucning a torpedo).

To get a good feel for the effectiveness of any particular tactic or strategy, you would be well rewarded in reading various AARs rather than just asking these sorts of questions out of context in this thread. AARs provide the necessary context to properly appraise your own performance and to understand why some things work better under some circumstances and not others.

Alfred


MBs are useful in both roles, although I disagree that DB/TB can take over the same roles that a naval attack trained medium bomber
squad.

Range makes a real difference. If your mission is naval denial, deterrence or ASW, a good anti shipping medium bomber squad simply can
cover more territory.


LoBaron,

Notwithstanding my high regard for your analytical capabilities, I don't think you have quite understood my point. Remember my comment was given to an Allied player still in the early stages of the war.

Yes, as I indicated well trained medium bombers at a suitable height can land bombs on ships. And yes medium bombers do tend to have a greater range. The point is whether it is the best use of them. Consider the following factors which detract from the superficial attractiveness of using medium bombers on naval strike missions.

1. Unescorted bomber strike packages are liable to be shreded by enemy cap. The greater range of a medium bomber over that of a dive/torpedo bomber is therefore not the important range factor. What is the determinative range factor is that of the escorting fighters.

2. My specific comment distinguished between torpedo and bomb carrying medium bombers (and also PBYs etc). Against merchantmen, even 100lb GP bombs can be deadly, let alone 500lb GP bombs. Against Japanese warships, those 500lb GP bombs are much less effective, and against anything bigger than a destroyer will usually bounce off. Only dive and torpedo bombers (with a very few other planes) carry the necessary ordnance to gain full value for any hits they are capable of delivering after having run the gauntlet of Japanese CAP and AA.

3. Most medium bombers consume more supply per sortie than do dive/torpedo bombers. Hence even if they could generate the same hit ratio (which they do not) as similarly skilled dive/torpedo bombers, medium bombers are a more expensive way of delivering their ordnance on target, which even when delivered, causes on average less damage to enemy ships.

4. Most medium bomber pilots enter the game with a much higher ground attack than naval attack skill. Concentrating their primary training on ground attack rather than on naval attack will considerably shorten the time period before the unit becomes combat ready. There really is little value in throwing untrained units into combat before they are ready; doing so will generally just turn them into cannon fodder and fail to achieve their targets anyway. Appropriate player patience is necessary.

5. Against land targets (either enemy LCUs or bases) the efficiency role is reversed. For that medium bombers are superior. It seems to me to be a waste of limited Allied resources to fritter away medium bomber airframes on missions which are not their forte (when much better suited and designed airframes are available for that task) and then find themselve with a much depleted airforce to carry out those tasks they are better suited for.

Alfred

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 356
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/7/2011 8:26:36 AM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline
Touché Alfred.

I have only read your post and so missed the context of your response.

_____________________________


(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 357
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/7/2011 4:06:10 PM   
brian800000

 

Posts: 225
Joined: 9/15/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: brian800000

Another question: I've trained a number of medium bombers for naval attack, and they are bombing at 7k. They are up to 60+ in naval bombing skill, and to date they have been highly effective in making huge splashes around enemy ships. Less effective at hitting them.

Have I done something wrong, had bad luck, or are level bombers from 7k just worthless on naval attack?


Most people around here do use their medium bombers on naval attack. I personally think it is a misallocation of resources. If well trained in naval attack skill and operating from a low enough altitude they will get some hits but not enough to make it really worthwhile. Concentrate medium bombers on land targets, sea targets should be primarily reserved to dive and torpedo bombers (or other plane types capable of laucning a torpedo).

To get a good feel for the effectiveness of any particular tactic or strategy, you would be well rewarded in reading various AARs rather than just asking these sorts of questions out of context in this thread. AARs provide the necessary context to properly appraise your own performance and to understand why some things work better under some circumstances and not others.

Alfred


Thanks Alfred, but in a sense I'm asking this more as a general inquiry rather than for specific help in my game (which at this point is more of a tutorial for me to learn how to play the game). I've spent about 3.5 months training some medium bombers up to a decent naval bomb skill. I didn't use low naval bombing because some on the forum seemed to think the results were too effective. But now at 7k I'm not getting any results against APs and AKs. Those 3.5 months seem to have been wasted.

Now against the AI I'm not too concerned about running into CAP in an unexpected place, but I know if I was a Japanese player watching wave after wave of unescorted bombers I might be inclined to sneak a nearby carrier over to provide some CAP and cut those planes to pieces. If this tactic is ineffective against the AI, it would seem to be even moreso against a human--where it would also be reckless.

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 358
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/7/2011 7:17:23 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brian800000
Thanks Alfred, but in a sense I'm asking this more as a general inquiry rather than for specific help in my game (which at this point is more of a tutorial for me to learn how to play the game). I've spent about 3.5 months training some medium bombers up to a decent naval bomb skill. I didn't use low naval bombing because some on the forum seemed to think the results were too effective. But now at 7k I'm not getting any results against APs and AKs. Those 3.5 months seem to have been wasted.

Now against the AI I'm not too concerned about running into CAP in an unexpected place, but I know if I was a Japanese player watching wave after wave of unescorted bombers I might be inclined to sneak a nearby carrier over to provide some CAP and cut those planes to pieces. If this tactic is ineffective against the AI, it would seem to be even moreso against a human--where it would also be reckless.



Twin engines were used on low nav missions and were very successful if the experience was decent. Thats why its so dangerous to venture in their range.
It is quite realistic as long as you leave the heavies up where they belong.

That for example ia a nice attack from a couple of twins in our PBEM recently, as always beautifully executed by Rob...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Soerabaja at 56,104

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 11,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 11 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 16



Allied aircraft
B-339D x 4
DB-7B x 3
B-25C Mitchell x 9
Hudson III (LR) x 10


No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
B-339D: 2 destroyed
B-25C Mitchell: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged
Hudson III (LR): 1 destroyed, 4 damaged

Japanese Ships
CM Yaeyama, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
CM Itsukushima
xAK Yamagata Maru, Bomb hits 2
xAK Ryuzan Maru, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires
xAK Yamahagi Maru, Bomb hits 2, on fire



Aircraft Attacking:
8 x B-25C Mitchell bombing from 100 feet
Naval Attack: 6 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
3 x DB-7B bombing from 8000 feet
Naval Attack: 4 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
8 x Hudson III (LR) bombing from 100 feet
Naval Attack: 4 x 250 lb SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Tainan Ku S-1 Det A with A6M2 Zero (2 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 29000 , scrambling fighters to 8000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 25 minutes
Junyo-1 with A6M2 Zero (3 airborne, 7 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 32810 , scrambling fighters between 9000 and 32000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 18 minutes
4 planes vectored on to bombers


The Brewsters really made a lot of difference by tangling with the Zekes.

_____________________________


(in reply to brian800000)
Post #: 359
RE: A few newbie questions - 2/7/2011 7:19:17 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline
PS: against the AI its maybe a bit unfair because it exposes their convoys too much, but against a human its absolutely ok
as he should now about how dangerous they are.

_____________________________


(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 360
Page:   <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: A few newbie questions Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   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

2.813