obvert
Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
quote:
ORIGINAL: obvert
quote:
ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
quote:
ORIGINAL: obvert
The one limitation that leads to 4Es being used so much to support ground troops is the inability of the game to show the effectiveness of F/FB in strafing and close support rocket and bomb strikes. This part of the game just isn't viable on a large scale, as it was in the war, so the 4Es take that role.
I get your suggested point and crsutton's counterpoint. But is this a question of 'inability of the game' or 'just the way things work out'? I've not seen many late war games where Allied players really-o truly-o give ground attack FBs precedence. The P-47s are worth their weight in gold in the air war in most AARs I've seen. I've not seen a convincing Allied effort to separate out the heavier FBs for airfield strafing / rocket attacks as it's usually 'all hands on deck' for capable A2A airframes.
So, until I'm convinced that mass application of Allied FB firepower has been tried and universally recognized as incapable, I really can't say that it's a game 'inability' so much as a supply:demand issue. Most players would probably commit to air superiority and neutralizing the enemy's A2A options, so it kind of makes it their choice for why FBs / ground attack isn't as effective as IRL.
Strafing against ground troops has negligible impact. There are no air launched rockets or napalm in game.
The demand issue is there, yes, but that is specific to the conditions of game, especially PDU-ON and of course non-historical OOB scenarios with the added ability of the player to R & D airframes well ahead of their historical arrival dates.
I self-imposed an HR against 4E ground bombing in my previous Allied game against Greyjoy because I wanted to see what the 2E, FB and some fighters would do. You'll never use the P-47s as they were in the war for many reasons, not the least that the Japanese have a wildy different OOB, service capability and inter-service coordination ability in the air war than they did historically. I play Japan as you know and intimately understand the huge advantages a Japanese player has even in a stock game over historical. Japan did not and could not have made 250-400 Tojos per month in 42, 300-400 George/Jack per month in 43-45 and 300 Franks per month in 43-45.
So the P-47, at less than 1,200 production in 43-44 (pre-N version) simply can't keep up unitl the P-51 and Corsairs start to come in numbers mid-late 44.
In my experience the FBs and attack bombers can get by with low levels runs against lightly defended troops, but with decent AA in hex, especially in DBB scenarios, but even late patch stock really, the losses are heavy compared to the impact.
With certain CAP settings (low layered CAP) even the P-47 struggles to match Japanese 2nd and 3rd gen fighters, so it's also hard to punch a hole the FB or 2E can get through, but 4E will actually get through to target even in the face of losses. I was happy in that game to lose 300 airframes in a days battle over Rabaul in 43 just to get the fields almost closed and get the defenders worn out so that after a few more turns (of more losses) I would finally have air supremacy.
Historically fighters would have also been there straffing fields, hitting supply dumps, targeting specific logistical support. In game it just doesn't work that way.
What was a typical P-47 pilot's ground attack or strafe skill in your cited game, Obvert? If <70 apiece, do you think that may have had something to do with your observed inefficiency in the ground attack role?
I would venture that few Allied players spend much time training their jug pilots up on these roles to this level. They're probably too busy focusing on "Air" and "Defense". This probably compounds the perception that the game doesn't support the FB role-because of pilot skill in this disparate activity.
I never used the P-47 to attack at 100ft in game. That would be silly! 
As I said, strafing is not viable as it was historically.
That said, all fighter for any side I play are trained to strafe as it trains defensive skills. So all of my pilots would have been 70+ in strafing.
Some that were FB pilots also had low ground bombing skills. I used them against small targets with no AA protection. mostly little Japanese Coy and naval guard units. Those they can handle just fine. It's large, well protected units in a defended hex with decent CAP in numbers that are the problem. One of the tactics of the Allies using 2E and FB and F strafers was to come in low to avoid early warning and get the jump on enemy positions. This worked. It does in game. AA is always awake and ready!
_____________________________
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
|
Printable Version
RE: June 1944 - 
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