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: May 1944

 
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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: May 1944 Page: <<   < prev  117 118 [119] 120 121   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 12:34:03 PM   
JohnDillworth


Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

This post is worthless without the combat replay. Heck, one of those targets is clear terrain.

Sorry, I don't have any replays for Operation Cobra. It happened in real life, not in a game. That's my point. The results John are seeing are absolutely historical. They represent what happened in real life. To call them "horse caca" is just sour grapes. 4EB were used in real life against troop concentrations. To great effect. The results (800 casualties in the game, 1,000 in real life)are quite similar at almost the exact same time of the the war. To indicate the Allies were not capable of doing this or the game engine is borked is just plain wrong. It happened...historical events cited. Why not just make a house rule that Japan can object to any turn it does not like and the Allied player must be forced to withdraw the turn and never use the successful method again because it hurt the Japanese players feelings.

_____________________________

Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3541
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 12:41:36 PM   
JohnDillworth


Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

I'd be extermely pleased and interested if anyone could bring in additional information and sources regarding this subject

Cited 4EB Bombardment July 1944

_____________________________

Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly

(in reply to adarbrauner)
Post #: 3542
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 1:05:18 PM   
Panther Bait


Posts: 654
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline 		A couple of thoughts/points/questions:

1. The game report of 800 casualties is mostly flavor/fluff, devices/squads are what really matters. What was the actual damage (destroyed and/or disabled) devices/squads? The raids at Caen/St Lo didn't necessarily kill a lot of Germans, but they caused massive disruption (and probably what would be considered disabled squads in AE). Was recently re-reading Steel Inferno, and Michael Reynolds has some good descriptions of the raids. I am not sure if Normandy would be considered open terrain either, maybe though.

2. Even if one particular unit did most/all of the damage, you can't really parse that out as unrealistic. I think the game engine sort of "averages out" combat results, some attackers do a lot of damage, others do nothing. You need to look at the whole raid size to judge the effect. Unless you're seeing a single raid of 36 (no other planes) getting the same results raid after raid, I wouldn't claim foul automatically.

3. In game terms, the fortification level at Monte Cassino (although this might be more like terrain than forts) and Iwo Jima were probably higher than a 3 or 4. Caen/St Lo are probably more representative of level 3-4 fortifications.

Those are my thoughts. At some level though, the others have a point that there is a counter, fighters and AAA and not fighting in open terrain. If you need your limited AAA assets elsewhere or don't want throw fighters in the meat grinder, those are choices, not flaws in the game engine.

Mike


_____________________________

When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard

(in reply to JohnDillworth)
Post #: 3543
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 1:13:29 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

quote:

This post is worthless without the combat replay. Heck, one of those targets is clear terrain.

Sorry, I don't have any replays for Operation Cobra. It happened in real life, not in a game. That's my point. The results John are seeing are absolutely historical. They represent what happened in real life. To call them "horse caca" is just sour grapes. 4EB were used in real life against troop concentrations. To great effect. The results (800 casualties in the game, 1,000 in real life)are quite similar at almost the exact same time of the the war. To indicate the Allies were not capable of doing this or the game engine is borked is just plain wrong. It happened...historical events cited. Why not just make a house rule that Japan can object to any turn it does not like and the Allied player must be forced to withdraw the turn and never use the successful method again because it hurt the Japanese players feelings.


John, my post is to the other John.

There are counters to heavy bombing in the game....but without the combat report we have no clue as to what John availed himself of -- perhaps he has a point. There is not enough information to make a judgement.

(in reply to JohnDillworth)
Post #: 3544
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 1:20:26 PM   
adarbrauner

 

Posts: 1496
Joined: 11/3/2016
From: Zichron Yaaqov, Israel; Before, Treviso, Italy
Status: offline
quote:

3. In game terms, the fortification level at Monte Cassino (although this might be more like terrain than forts) and Iwo Jima were probably higher than a 3 or 4. Caen/St Lo are probably more representative of level 3-4 fortifications.


If the emplacements at Iwo Jimo were immune to the highest calibers of the navy, so then it should be rightously thought of a very high "fortification level". 6? 7? more?

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3545
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 1:29:27 PM   
JohnDillworth


Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

John, my post is to the other John.
Chippy attitude withdrawn. I'm trapped in the house in a blizzard and it is way to early to dip into all that extra win I bought :-)

_____________________________

Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3546
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 2:02:08 PM   
Bearcat2

 

Posts: 577
Joined: 2/14/2004
Status: offline 		Hard to kill Germans at Monte Cassino when there were no Germans at the Abbey when they bombed it with the B-17's on 2/15/44, they did manage to kill a couple of hundred Italians seeking refuge at the Abbey. The US dropped leaflets telling the people that they were going to bomb the area; the civilians were given a safe passage through German lines, unfortunately for the Italians in the Abbey; it was for the 16th day after they bombed the Abbey.

_____________________________

"After eight years as President I have only two regrets: that I have not shot Henry Clay or hanged John C. Calhoun."--1837

(in reply to JohnDillworth)
Post #: 3547
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 2:19:48 PM   
adarbrauner

 

Posts: 1496
Joined: 11/3/2016
From: Zichron Yaaqov, Israel; Before, Treviso, Italy
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

quote:

I'd be extermely pleased and interested if anyone could bring in additional information and sources regarding this subject

Cited 4EB Bombardment July 1944


Good readings!

If so, the game should provide for some friendly casualties as well deriving from carpet bombing

(in reply to JohnDillworth)
Post #: 3548
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 2:27:47 PM   
Panther Bait


Posts: 654
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: adarbrauner

quote:

3. In game terms, the fortification level at Monte Cassino (although this might be more like terrain than forts) and Iwo Jima were probably higher than a 3 or 4. Caen/St Lo are probably more representative of level 3-4 fortifications.


If the emplacements at Iwo Jimo were immune to the highest calibers of the navy, so then it should be rightously thought of a very high "fortification level". 6? 7? more?


Unfortunately, I'm not sure there is a good description of what the various fort levels actually mean, but the forts at Iwo Jima included a lot of heavily reinforced concrete structures and other fortifications built deep into native rock. That would seem to me to qualify for at least 6 or 7, probably even higher.

Mike

_____________________________

When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard

(in reply to adarbrauner)
Post #: 3549
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 3:16:25 PM   
Lecivius


Posts: 4845
Joined: 8/5/2007
From: Denver
Status: offline 		With a nod to historical bombing results vs. in game results, one needs to keep both sides in mind. I think that point might be missed here.

Historically, 4E's were used, albeit in limited operations, for tactical as opposed to strategic purposes. In the Pacific, these tactical operations were used more, but typically with fewer aircraft, just due to the lack of air-frames. In game, they are used against troop concentrations to devastating effect. However, also in game, the Japanese do have counters to this not available in real life. It IS a game, after all.

Flip side.

Historically, the Japanese used their 2E's to devastating effect early in the war. I would point out, and have posted on these forums, the dichotomy of the effect of 2E torpedo bombers against shipping in game terms as opposed to historical terms. Japanese 2E's flew with no, to very poor, fighter opposition early in the war. This contributed to their success in bombing. There were only a few squadrons of 2E's trained for torpedo attack. Historically, in the early years the Japanese had a 9-14% success rate in 2E torpedo attacks. In game, the are truly feared, with a 55-65% success rate.

My point being, there are trade off's. Your 2E torpedo attack results are simply not historical. The 4E's used by the allies is not truly historical. Nerfing one, would mean accepting limitations on the other.

I can appreciate your not liking to get smacked around. No one playing the allies likes it either, in the first half of the game. Ponder what you need to do, and use your counters as best you can. People here are always willing to offer suggestions to help (someone ALWAYS has an opinion...even me )

_____________________________

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

(in reply to Panther Bait)
Post #: 3550
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 3:23:59 PM   
Bearcat2

 

Posts: 577
Joined: 2/14/2004
Status: offline 		The obvious Japanese counter to allied bombers is AAA and fighters

< Message edited by Termite2 -- 3/14/2017 3:25:28 PM >

_____________________________

"After eight years as President I have only two regrets: that I have not shot Henry Clay or hanged John C. Calhoun."--1837

(in reply to Lecivius)
Post #: 3551
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 5:32:12 PM   
JohnDillworth


Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

The 4E's used by the allies is not truly historical

As pointed out above with historical citation it was absolutely historical. It happened. These are not "alternative facts". 4EB were successfully used by the allies against the Axis in large numbers at almost exactly the same time frame as the game with almost identical results. Facts are stubborn things indeed

_____________________________

Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly

(in reply to Lecivius)
Post #: 3552
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 6:11:58 PM   
Lecivius


Posts: 4845
Joined: 8/5/2007
From: Denver
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

quote:

The 4E's used by the allies is not truly historical

As pointed out above with historical citation it was absolutely historical. It happened. These are not "alternative facts". 4EB were successfully used by the allies against the Axis in large numbers at almost exactly the same time frame as the game with almost identical results. Facts are stubborn things indeed


I agree completely. Heavy bombers were used, and on multiple occasions in both theaters. And usually with devastating effect. But not to the degree available 'in game'. As I said, this is a game. Things are a bit distorted, and on both sides.

_____________________________

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

(in reply to JohnDillworth)
Post #: 3553
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 6:17:06 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

With a nod to historical bombing results vs. in game results, one needs to keep both sides in mind. I think that point might be missed here.

Historically, 4E's were used, albeit in limited operations, for tactical as opposed to strategic purposes. In the Pacific, these tactical operations were used more, but typically with fewer aircraft, just due to the lack of air-frames. In game, they are used against troop concentrations to devastating effect. However, also in game, the Japanese do have counters to this not available in real life. It IS a game, after all.

Flip side.

Historically, the Japanese used their 2E's to devastating effect early in the war. I would point out, and have posted on these forums, the dichotomy of the effect of 2E torpedo bombers against shipping in game terms as opposed to historical terms. Japanese 2E's flew with no, to very poor, fighter opposition early in the war. This contributed to their success in bombing. There were only a few squadrons of 2E's trained for torpedo attack. Historically, in the early years the Japanese had a 9-14% success rate in 2E torpedo attacks. In game, the are truly feared, with a 55-65% success rate.

My point being, there are trade off's. Your 2E torpedo attack results are simply not historical. The 4E's used by the allies is not truly historical. Nerfing one, would mean accepting limitations on the other.

I can appreciate your not liking to get smacked around. No one playing the allies likes it either, in the first half of the game. Ponder what you need to do, and use your counters as best you can. People here are always willing to offer suggestions to help (someone ALWAYS has an opinion...even me )


The Japanese player can (and does) use massive land based bomber attacks to spearhead his ground offensives. This happens all through 1942 and well into 1943. My opponent is not shy about using 200-300 bombers in one massed attack. The effect is devastating and almost guarantees that the defending units will be too disrupted to resist a land attack. In reality, after the first six months of the war-Japanese land based bombers attacks became very impotent in any theater but China. Even by the Guadacanal campaign the Japanese were bombing at 20,000 feet and not doing it very well. Don't get me started about the magic of every Nell and Betty being torpedo capable and trained.

Sooo....I think that there is a definitive imbalance for the Japanese in the first two years with that swinging to the Allies in the last two years. It ain't exactly right, but it works out.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Lecivius)
Post #: 3554
RE: May 1944 - 3/14/2017 9:12:45 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline 		Strange discussion, if any commander has masses of bombers available and ready to fly why would he not use them to bomb troops LOL

However if really only 36 B24s caused these massive losses it might be overboard, but as someone pointed out, we have not enough info (yet) to judge.

As for Monte Casino not sure if this would represent forts, this was an middle aged abey, right ? Sure the Germans did some more work to fortify, but basically it was masonry not steel/concrete. And from what I recall yes, the masonry was put to rubble quite a bit, which assisted quite a bit to defenders iirc Same like in WW1 when arty fire assists putting shell holes, where soldiers find some shelter in no mans land

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 3/14/2017 9:15:43 PM >

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 3555
RE: May 1944 - 3/15/2017 1:36:04 AM   
Bif1961


Posts: 2014
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline 		One problem was in the Pacific was target identification, you can't bomb accurately what you can't find. Bombing targets in a jungle environment is nearly impossible as the jungle hides the target. The Allies actually employed a form of area bombing and it was far more miss than hit. Add in weather and short time over target and it means the chance of a meaningful strike is very limited.

< Message edited by Bif1961 -- 3/15/2017 1:37:18 AM >

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 3556
RE: May 1944 - 3/15/2017 5:50:50 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Haven't had to read all the Posts fellas. Knew my rant from last night would touch off the inevitable 'Cobra' comparisons.

My Mother-in-Law fell this evening and has broken her neck. Luckily the spinal cord appears to be good but she is currently in emergency surgery. This Posting is not meant to derail the conversation--especially since I want to read it!--just needed to explain why I wasn't on and probably won't be until later tomorrow.

Please continue the discussion!

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Bif1961)
Post #: 3557
RE: May 1944 - 3/15/2017 1:54:35 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		I don't think we can carry on a discussion about a game after that horrendous news.

Here is hoping and praying for a recovery.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3558
RE: May 1944 - 3/15/2017 2:12:32 PM   
Lecivius


Posts: 4845
Joined: 8/5/2007
From: Denver
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I don't think we can carry on a discussion about a game after that horrendous news.

Here is hoping and praying for a recovery.


Agreed

_____________________________

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3559
RE: May 1944 - 3/15/2017 3:05:30 PM   
pws1225

 

Posts: 1166
Joined: 8/9/2010
From: Tate's Hell, Florida
Status: offline 		Terrible news. I hope all goes well and that her recovery will be swift.

(in reply to Lecivius)
Post #: 3560
RE: May 1944 - 3/15/2017 3:11:54 PM   
Panther Bait


Posts: 654
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline 		John,

I hope your mother in law pulls through okay, although I expect it will be a long road back even then. I think I can say we'll all keep warm thoughts in our hearts.

Mike


_____________________________

When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard

(in reply to Lecivius)
Post #: 3561
RE: May 1944 - 3/15/2017 5:52:02 PM   
Bif1961


Posts: 2014
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline 		Hoping for her successful surgery and a swift recovery.

(in reply to Panther Bait)
Post #: 3562
RE: May 1944 - 3/16/2017 4:11:50 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Just sent this to Michael and Dan but thought I'd Post it here as well:

Hi Guys.

Worked until 3:30pm today and then went to the hospital. My Mother-in-Law was in surgery from 2-5pm and they didn’t let her up to her room until 8pm. We got home around 9:00pm. Tired and worn out but Mary (Paula’s Mom) did quite well with the surgery and LOOKS like she will recover. She had to have her C7-C8 fused together with a metal plate and screws but everything looks OK. She has a three month (minimum) recovery in front of her.

John

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Bif1961)
Post #: 3563
RE: May 1944 - 3/16/2017 5:52:40 AM   
BillBrown


Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline 		That is good news John.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3564
RE: May 1944 - 3/16/2017 4:18:10 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Thanks guys. Much appreciated.

Got a turn off to Dan and am headed to work. Am planning on an update tonight.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to BillBrown)
Post #: 3565
June 1944 - 3/17/2017 3:53:36 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Wanted to take a moment and Post what the surviving Kaigun looks like presently:

The main portion of the Fleet is at Yokohoma:
Kido Butai-1
CV--Hiryu, Soryu, Shokaku
CVL-Ibuki
CB Ikoma
CA 2, CL, and DD 6

Kido Butai-2
CV--Unryu, Amagi, Katsuragi, and Kasigi
BC--Hiei
CA 2, CL, and DD 6

Kido Butai-3
CV--Ryukaku, Taikaku, Renkaku (Shokaku-Kai Class)
CV--Junyo
BC--Kongo
CA 2, CL, DD 6

STF-1
BC--Kirishima
CA 2, and 8 DD

Aircraft: 413 A6M8/Sam, 229 Judy, and 170 Jills.

BB Ise is unassigned as she is re-sizing FP groups by the bucket.


Dutch East Indies
Kido Butai-4
CV--Akagi, Aso, Ikoma
CVL-Ryujo, Shoho, Ryuho, Kurama
BC--Haruna
CA 1, CL 2, DD 9

Aircraft: 218 A6M8/Sam, 55 Judy, 87 Jills.

STF-2
BB--Nagato and Musashi
CL 2, and DD 5

There is one CA getting repaired at Saigon presently.

That is the entire Fleet.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to JohnDillworth)
Post #: 3566
RE: June 1944 - 3/17/2017 4:10:05 PM   
Anachro


Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline 		Serial 0228E June 3, 1942
SECRET

From: Commander-in-Chief, Combined Fleet
To: Commander, Mobile Fleet (Operation Plan Z)
Subject: Letter of Instruction

1. In carrying out the task assigned in Operation Z you will be governed
by the principle of calculated risk, which you shall interpret to mean the avoidance
of exposure of your force to attack by superior enemy forces without good prospect
of inflicting, as a result of such exposure, greater damage to the enemy.

2. The fate of the nation rests on the outcome of this one battle and you should act
accordingly.

Toyoda

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3567
RE: June 1944 - 3/17/2017 4:57:18 PM   
DRF99


Posts: 90
Joined: 9/3/2009
Status: offline 		So the main KB is:
418F, 229DB, 170TB

And the DEI KB is:
218F, 55DB, 87TB

Combined they would be:
636F, 284DB, 257TB

Are you better combining them? Would the combined KB have a significantly better chance going toe-to-toe against the Death Star or not? I don't know the answer but if the present main KB would have a low chance of success and the combined a 50/50 or better chance you should consider combining them. I'm not sure what the benefit of the DEI KB is and if it's worth the increased risk to the main KB.

DRF

(in reply to Anachro)
Post #: 3568
RE: May 1944 - 3/17/2017 7:22:34 PM   
MechFO

 

Posts: 669
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

quote:

What a load of horse caca...

In June & July 1944 the Allies successfully use 4EB to inflict similar casualties on large concentrations of dug in German troops. Lancaster's, Liberators and B-17 bombardments were regularly used before attacks to do exactly what Dan is doing. There is historical precedent for this. On July 26th 1944, the 8th airforce used 4EB to kill 1,000 German troops. The Germans had no fighter cover and little AAA to speak of and the results were devastating. You need fighters, you need AAA. Without them, you are seeing accurate, historical results.


Even in the one case where it arguably worked, it took

1500 4EB
300 2EB
500 FB

all flying at very short range, so with heavy bomb loads, to achieve the effect.

A few dozen or even a hundred 4EB achieving something similar is ludicrous.

This kind of support stopped because the effect was dismal compared to the massive resources invested.

Fewer bombers will get disproportionally worse results since a smaller footprint means a heavy reliance on intel, targeting and accuracy to hit something worthwhile.

That said, this is a game engine, with all the idiosyncrasies that this entails.


< Message edited by MechFO -- 3/17/2017 7:30:38 PM >

(in reply to JohnDillworth)
Post #: 3569
RE: May 1944 - 3/17/2017 7:30:42 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

quote:

What a load of horse caca...

In June & July 1944 the Allies successfully use 4EB to inflict similar casualties on large concentrations of dug in German troops. Lancaster's, Liberators and B-17 bombardments were regularly used before attacks to do exactly what Dan is doing. There is historical precedent for this. On July 26th 1944, the 8th airforce used 4EB to kill 1,000 German troops. The Germans had no fighter cover and little AAA to speak of and the results were devastating. You need fighters, you need AAA. Without them, you are seeing accurate, historical results.


Even in the one case where it arguably worked, it took

1500 4EB
300 2EB
500 FB

all flying at very short range, so with heavy bomb loads, to achieve the effect.

A few dozen or even a hundred 4EB achieving something similar is ludicrous.

This kind of support stopped because the effect was dismal compared to the massive resources invested.



No more ludicrous than netties having a 60%-65% hit rate with torpedoes......

You want the 4Es nerfed then in all fairness you HAVE to nerf the netties as well.c




< Message edited by HansBolter -- 3/17/2017 7:33:15 PM >

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 3570
Page:   <<   < prev  117 118 [119] 120 121   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: May 1944 Page: <<   < prev  117 118 [119] 120 121   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

0.953