Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Pearl Harbor Killer Flak!

 
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 >> Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 2:56:31 PM   
rev rico

 

Posts: 155
Joined: 5/7/2010
Status: offline
Oh my! In my new PBEM beta RA 6.6 game, my initial PH strike (with Dec 7 Surprise ON) had this result

Japanese aircraft losses
B5N2 Kate: 61 damaged
B5N2 Kate: 25 destroyed by flak
D3A1 Val: 21 damaged
D3A1 Val: 3 destroyed by flak

OUCH!
Post #: 1
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 3:09:32 PM   
dr.hal


Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline
Was that actual damage or Fog of War damage?

_____________________________


(in reply to rev rico)
Post #: 2
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 3:32:22 PM   
rev rico

 

Posts: 155
Joined: 5/7/2010
Status: offline
That was the combat report. It was actually more Kates because the damaged ones didn't all make it back. It was bad. Real bad.
I didn't realize how more effective flak was with beta and RA.

(in reply to dr.hal)
Post #: 3
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 3:38:30 PM   
rev rico

 

Posts: 155
Joined: 5/7/2010
Status: offline
I should add that I had the Kates coming in at 2000'. That had proven to be the most effective altitude in all my previous games and test runs for the PH attack. I guess I will never do that again! :-0

(in reply to rev rico)
Post #: 4
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 3:49:11 PM   
Xargun

 

Posts: 3690
Joined: 2/14/2004
From: Near Columbus, Ohio
Status: offline
Was this the Dec 7th surprise attack or a followup attack ? And was Surprised turned on -- this greatly reduces the flak at PH for turn 1.

(in reply to rev rico)
Post #: 5
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 3:52:22 PM   
rev rico

 

Posts: 155
Joined: 5/7/2010
Status: offline
Dec 7 Surprise attack, very first attack
yes, I double checked and surprise was ON


(in reply to Xargun)
Post #: 6
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 4:19:09 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rev rico

I should add that I had the Kates coming in at 2000'. That had proven to be the most effective altitude in all my previous games and test runs for the PH attack. I guess I will never do that again! :-0


Therein lies your mistake. At that point, everyone with a handgun or air-rifle will be taking pot shots at you, let alone the 20 and 40mm guns.

(in reply to rev rico)
Post #: 7
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 4:22:01 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
Here's mine against database flak updates:

quote:

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 11 damaged
A6M2 Zero: 13 destroyed by flak
B5N2 Kate: 6 damaged
B5N2 Kate: 3 destroyed by flak
D3A1 Val: 23 damaged
D3A1 Val: 7 destroyed by flak


It was really rough. Those Zeroes were on airfield attack at 100 feet. Surprise was on, as well as historical first turn. I recommend not doing historical first turn if you are using the database updates (or DBB).

(in reply to rev rico)
Post #: 8
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 4:56:01 PM   
rev rico

 

Posts: 155
Joined: 5/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Therein lies your mistake. At that point, everyone with a handgun or air-rifle will be taking pot shots at you, let alone the 20 and 40mm guns.


I figured, but the Vals dropped to 1000-2000' to drop bombs and didn't suffer badly. It's obviously a new thing with beta and/or RA 6.6

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 9
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 5:40:53 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline
But the Allied flak in PH on December 7 shoots with the same effectiveness as on any other day. The surprise effect does not seem to affect the AA crews at all - they are at 100% war footing. Go figure.

(in reply to rev rico)
Post #: 10
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 5:50:34 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rev rico


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Therein lies your mistake. At that point, everyone with a handgun or air-rifle will be taking pot shots at you, let alone the 20 and 40mm guns.


I figured, but the Vals dropped to 1000-2000' to drop bombs and didn't suffer badly. It's obviously a new thing with beta and/or RA 6.6


Not in the beta, but in the scenario files. The database updates make concentrated flak (such as at PH on December 7) really brutal. Much closer to real life effectiveness, I guess. Losing only about 8 planes, or some cases none, as can happen in stock is simply absurd.

(in reply to rev rico)
Post #: 11
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 6:40:42 PM   
Gaspote


Posts: 303
Joined: 6/30/2013
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: rev rico


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Therein lies your mistake. At that point, everyone with a handgun or air-rifle will be taking pot shots at you, let alone the 20 and 40mm guns.


I figured, but the Vals dropped to 1000-2000' to drop bombs and didn't suffer badly. It's obviously a new thing with beta and/or RA 6.6


Not in the beta, but in the scenario files. The database updates make concentrated flak (such as at PH on December 7) really brutal. Much closer to real life effectiveness, I guess. Losing only about 8 planes, or some cases none, as can happen in stock is simply absurd.


It should be the case for the 7th surprise. It's what japanese lost. In my opinion, for all scenario, all flak should be remove and add the 8th in any place so the japanese can attack freely with historical result.

I mean in most case the allied just retreat even without lose so the jap have the opportunity to hit hard only the 7th and he should be able to do that.

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 12
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 7:03:41 PM   
HansBolter


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gaspote


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: rev rico


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Therein lies your mistake. At that point, everyone with a handgun or air-rifle will be taking pot shots at you, let alone the 20 and 40mm guns.


I figured, but the Vals dropped to 1000-2000' to drop bombs and didn't suffer badly. It's obviously a new thing with beta and/or RA 6.6


Not in the beta, but in the scenario files. The database updates make concentrated flak (such as at PH on December 7) really brutal. Much closer to real life effectiveness, I guess. Losing only about 8 planes, or some cases none, as can happen in stock is simply absurd.


It should be the case for the 7th surprise. It's what japanese lost. In my opinion, for all scenario, all flak should be remove and add the 8th in any place so the japanese can attack freely with historical result.

I mean in most case the allied just retreat even without lose so the jap have the opportunity to hit hard only the 7th and he should be able to do that.




The Allies SHOULD also be able to shoot anything out of the skies in '44 with near impunity, but this isn't the case in the game.

It's a game, not an exact recreation of history.

If it was no one would play Japanese.

This point has been made many, many times on this forum....mostly by those who favor the Japanese side.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Gaspote)
Post #: 13
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 7:26:24 PM   
Erkki


Posts: 1461
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline
In one of my games I attacked Pearl for 3 days and failed to sink a single ship. As the matter of fact on the turn 1 only half of the B5Ns flew and I couldnt find any reason for it. Out of the 14 group sorties by B5Ns they bothered to carry torpedoes only on 4 IIRC. 2 of the CVs hadnt used a single torp when I had to give up as losses were growing unbearable. After that I've been a big advocate of attacking Manila rather than Pearl: much more consistent results, you get the KB where it matters the most right at the start and you have about 50 crack CV pilots more once the December 7th is done. The subs are just a bonus. Next time I'll probaby combine Manila attack with Mersing landings on the 8th or 9th.



quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

The Allies SHOULD also be able to shoot anything out of the skies in '44 with near impunity, but this isn't the case in the game.

It's a game, not an exact recreation of history.

If it was no one would play Japanese.

This point has been made many, many times on this forum....mostly by those who favor the Japanese side.



How would the real war have developed without a Midway exchange in mid 1942 which does not happen in most games? As you said, witpae is no history. Despite the Japanese player having control over production and having probably too much edge early on in China, most Allied players still dont seem to have too much trouble beating Japan in historical schedule. Perhaps not fully in historical fashion but by mid 1945 still. And even out of those games most are scenarios that have improved Japan's strength way or another. I cant recall a single Scen 1 or DBB PBEM AAR that has reached mid 1943, 1944 or longer and where it for sure looks like Japan is going to hold longer than in real life. Maybe your thought of historical Allied air supremacy in 1944 and onwards is not quite how it was in the real show, or perhaps the game has other things favoring the Allies that balance it out.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 14
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 8:11:21 PM   
Gaspote


Posts: 303
Joined: 6/30/2013
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gaspote


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: rev rico


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Therein lies your mistake. At that point, everyone with a handgun or air-rifle will be taking pot shots at you, let alone the 20 and 40mm guns.


I figured, but the Vals dropped to 1000-2000' to drop bombs and didn't suffer badly. It's obviously a new thing with beta and/or RA 6.6


Not in the beta, but in the scenario files. The database updates make concentrated flak (such as at PH on December 7) really brutal. Much closer to real life effectiveness, I guess. Losing only about 8 planes, or some cases none, as can happen in stock is simply absurd.


It should be the case for the 7th surprise. It's what japanese lost. In my opinion, for all scenario, all flak should be remove and add the 8th in any place so the japanese can attack freely with historical result.

I mean in most case the allied just retreat even without lose so the jap have the opportunity to hit hard only the 7th and he should be able to do that.




The Allies SHOULD also be able to shoot anything out of the skies in '44 with near impunity, but this isn't the case in the game.

It's a game, not an exact recreation of history.

If it was no one would play Japanese.

This point has been made many, many times on this forum....mostly by those who favor the Japanese side.


It's not like if the allies couldn't shot down a single plane in 1944.

The result in PH attack is like, 30 planes and no BB sunk and all repair in mid 1942. There are a huge difference compare to the 180 planes and all BB allmost sunk.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 15
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 8:36:59 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline
Guys, all I was doing was providing a 'counterpoint" example of how the game differs from history.

It's a game which means its intended to have variations of results which also means that sometimes you are going to be on the bad end of the extremes in those results.

Sometimes you roll a one and sometimes you roll a six (that's a boardgame reference for you young tikes not old enough to remember the golden era of board wargaming).

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Gaspote)
Post #: 16
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 8:40:54 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rev rico

I should add that I had the Kates coming in at 2000'. That had proven to be the most effective altitude in all my previous games and test runs for the PH attack. I guess I will never do that again! :-0


Don't ever do that against a target with lots of flak. TBs at 5,000 and DBs at 10,000 and don't use fighters to attack ground/sea targets. The TBs will drop to the appropriate altitude at the appropriate time to drop the fish. If they're using bombs or shells, the TBs should be at 5k. With torpedoes some players will run them in at 10k or higher. I don't. Now when you're running them in at 5, some escort fighters will come in with them at 7. Having said what I said, the TBs will not always use torpedoes even if you have them available and the squadron screen shows "use torpedoes". I think there's some commander discretion involved to not use up all the torpedo inventory too fast, and it's probably modified by the nature of the target. For instance, at Pearl, since many of the BBs were anchored side by side, only one of each pair could be torpedoed. Many of the Kates used (14" I believe) AP shells with wooden fins attached.

(in reply to rev rico)
Post #: 17
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 8:43:19 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Guys, all I was doing was providing a 'counterpoint" example of how the game differs from history.

It's a game which means its intended to have variations of results which also means that sometimes you are going to be on the bad end of the extremes in those results.

Sometimes you roll a one and sometimes you roll a six (that's a boardgame reference for you young tikes not old enough to remember the golden era of board wargaming).


I always roll "snake eyes" to honor my fellow reptiles.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 18
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 9:30:41 PM   
rev rico

 

Posts: 155
Joined: 5/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert


quote:

ORIGINAL: rev rico

I should add that I had the Kates coming in at 2000'. That had proven to be the most effective altitude in all my previous games and test runs for the PH attack. I guess I will never do that again! :-0


Don't ever do that against a target with lots of flak. TBs at 5,000 and DBs at 10,000 and don't use fighters to attack ground/sea targets. The TBs will drop to the appropriate altitude at the appropriate time to drop the fish. If they're using bombs or shells, the TBs should be at 5k. With torpedoes some players will run them in at 10k or higher. I don't. Now when you're running them in at 5, some escort fighters will come in with them at 7. Having said what I said, the TBs will not always use torpedoes even if you have them available and the squadron screen shows "use torpedoes". I think there's some commander discretion involved to not use up all the torpedo inventory too fast, and it's probably modified by the nature of the target. For instance, at Pearl, since many of the BBs were anchored side by side, only one of each pair could be torpedoed. Many of the Kates used (14" I believe) AP shells with wooden fins attached.


I won't in any mod scn, but I have been in the stock games and get max results for very few planes lost.


(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 19
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 9:34:13 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erkki

In one of my games I attacked Pearl for 3 days and failed to sink a single ship. As the matter of fact on the turn 1 only half of the B5Ns flew and I couldnt find any reason for it. Out of the 14 group sorties by B5Ns they bothered to carry torpedoes only on 4 IIRC. 2 of the CVs hadnt used a single torp when I had to give up as losses were growing unbearable. After that I've been a big advocate of attacking Manila rather than Pearl: much more consistent results, you get the KB where it matters the most right at the start and you have about 50 crack CV pilots more once the December 7th is done. The subs are just a bonus. Next time I'll probaby combine Manila attack with Mersing landings on the 8th or 9th.



quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

The Allies SHOULD also be able to shoot anything out of the skies in '44 with near impunity, but this isn't the case in the game.

It's a game, not an exact recreation of history.

If it was no one would play Japanese.

This point has been made many, many times on this forum....mostly by those who favor the Japanese side.



How would the real war have developed without a Midway exchange in mid 1942 which does not happen in most games? As you said, witpae is no history. Despite the Japanese player having control over production and having probably too much edge early on in China, most Allied players still dont seem to have too much trouble beating Japan in historical schedule. Perhaps not fully in historical fashion but by mid 1945 still. And even out of those games most are scenarios that have improved Japan's strength way or another. I cant recall a single Scen 1 or DBB PBEM AAR that has reached mid 1943, 1944 or longer and where it for sure looks like Japan is going to hold longer than in real life. Maybe your thought of historical Allied air supremacy in 1944 and onwards is not quite how it was in the real show, or perhaps the game has other things favoring the Allies that balance it out.


Not to side track the thread, but the reason the Allies can win in game faster are due to two main reasons, hindsight and no need to write letters home.

(in reply to Erkki)
Post #: 20
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/6/2014 11:40:57 PM   
msieving1


Posts: 526
Joined: 3/23/2007
From: Missouri
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gaspote


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: rev rico


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Therein lies your mistake. At that point, everyone with a handgun or air-rifle will be taking pot shots at you, let alone the 20 and 40mm guns.


I figured, but the Vals dropped to 1000-2000' to drop bombs and didn't suffer badly. It's obviously a new thing with beta and/or RA 6.6


Not in the beta, but in the scenario files. The database updates make concentrated flak (such as at PH on December 7) really brutal. Much closer to real life effectiveness, I guess. Losing only about 8 planes, or some cases none, as can happen in stock is simply absurd.


It should be the case for the 7th surprise. It's what japanese lost. In my opinion, for all scenario, all flak should be remove and add the 8th in any place so the japanese can attack freely with historical result.

I mean in most case the allied just retreat even without lose so the jap have the opportunity to hit hard only the 7th and he should be able to do that.



In real life, the Japanese lost about 10% of the attacking planes at Pearl Harbor (29 aircraft lost in total). So total losses of 25-30 planes is not ahistorical. Depending on how many damaged planes didn't make it back to the carriers, and how many planes were lost in air to air combat, the losses reported in this thread appear to be pretty reasonable.


_____________________________

-- Mark Sieving

(in reply to Gaspote)
Post #: 21
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/7/2014 2:56:08 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
How are we supposed to reason with some person of Japanese ethnicity who tried to drop a bomb on a car? We Thermians have closely inspected the historical document called "Pearl Harbor" about a Captain Rafe McCawley who we have personally verified as being an authentic hero and we can attest to the fact that there's nothing reasonable involved with any of this. Please stop making it harder to understand things as they really were.

(in reply to msieving1)
Post #: 22
RE: Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! - 6/7/2014 2:20:05 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline
Neo: What are you trying to tell me? That I can dodge bullets, flying the Zero with its 33 maneuver rating at 100 feet?

Morpheus: No, Neo. I'm trying to tell you that when you're ready, you won't have to. The patches are not real. The flak matrix still uses the vanilla code.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 23
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Pearl Harbor Killer Flak! Page: [1]
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

1.188