Betty Bombers

crusher · Post by **crusher** » Fri Jun 28, 2002 3:37 am

Hi i have played this game from its beginning and i still have problems with the Betty bombers. they are a deadly weapon but the problem is escorts. they tend to fly the max range and attack. they then end up getting smashed by enemy caps. the only solution i came up with is to base them in the rear bases and let them attack later in the turn. has anyone have any ideas on this. Even late in the game japan lacks a long range escort. i have tried not making it and stay with the G3 then switching to the ginga. a least these can be escorted.

BullHalsey · Post by **BullHalsey** » Fri Jun 28, 2002 4:47 am

I sympathize with your Betty Bombers attacking at long range at getting whacked, but this has occurred with any type of bomber and even within range of the fighters. I have cursed many times when bombers attacked without escorts and got wiped-out, and then the fighters do a fighter sweep from the very same base!!!

I have deduced one reason the bombers attack w/o the fighter escorts. Be sure that both the bomber and fighter that are attacking certain targets (e.g. ground support, ships at sea, etc.) are within normal range- not the extended range of the fighter.

You can set the mission NI if you want to conserve strength to oppose naval targets- instead of being frittered away in daylight raids against bases or use NIGHT missions to try to avoid fighters altogether.

Lokioftheaesir · Post by **Lokioftheaesir** » Fri Jun 28, 2002 12:15 pm

Originally posted by BullHalsey
I sympathize with your Betty Bombers attacking at long range at getting whacked, but this has occurred with any type of bomber and even within range of the fighters. I have cursed many times when bombers attacked without escorts and got wiped-out, and then the fighters do a fighter sweep from the very same base!!!

I have deduced one reason the bombers attack w/o the fighter escorts. Be sure that both the bomber and fighter that are attacking certain targets (e.g. ground support, ships at sea, etc.) are within normal range- not the extended range of the fighter.

You can set the mission NI if you want to conserve strength to oppose naval targets- instead of being frittered away in daylight raids against bases or use NIGHT missions to try to avoid fighters altogether.

Bull

So if i designate Rabaul's Air Target as say
Shortland (inside nonextended range of Zero)
the Betty's are less likely to do non escorted
attacks for that turn?

Loki

Jeremy Pritchard · Post by **Jeremy Pritchard** » Fri Jun 28, 2002 5:59 pm

I have always been contemplating changing the G4M to have a range of 6 to match with that of the A6M (compensated by an increased bomb load). However, then you would loose out on their great interdiction range (sticking a few at Tarawa causes havoc with poorly defended USN Transports).

I would not recommend getting rid of your G4M squadrons when the P1Y comes out, primarily because only the G4M can launch the deadly Onka Flying bombs.

So, there are two options...

1. Leave the Betty as it is, and have the player use certain tactics to limit its destruction.

2. Change the Betty to have shorter range, but compensated with an increased bomb load.

crusher · Post by **crusher** » Sat Jun 29, 2002 2:04 am

well i would vote for the increased bomb load and reduced range.

deVada · Post by **deVada** » Sat Jun 29, 2002 11:20 am

As alternative You could decerase bomb load and "mount" additional cannons. Range is one of two things that makes Betty's unworthy scrapping . The second is ability to carry torpedoes.
Good Luck !:p

Jeremy Pritchard · Post by **Jeremy Pritchard** » Sat Jun 29, 2002 6:40 pm

Adding weaponry will be too unhistoric, since the representation is currently its maximum. Also, increasing weaonry will not increase survival rate, just ability to kill enemy aircraft. Durability is what makes the US Heavy Bombers very good, but the Betty has pitiful, and should have.

The G4M is a great aircraft, due to its additional abilities (Onka and Torpedos), but the range can be a handicap. Probably a poll is in order?

wflarry · Post by **wflarry** » Sat Jun 29, 2002 10:13 pm

I would vote to leave the Betty as is.

I don't like to see them fly off on their own and get slaughtered either, but I like their long range. Early in the game they can deny large areas of ocean to the enemy. With adequate training, Late in the game they can be especially dangerous night bombers.

crusher · Post by **crusher** » Sun Jun 30, 2002 2:42 am

well first let me say that the matrix forums are the best i have ever seen. people really give good questions and answers . no nasty or mean posts. now back to the topic. the betty is very effective early in the war but late even with training the allies shoot down anything the japanese can throw at it. a range of six still would make it very effective early until the new allied ac start to be felt. could the zero's range be checked to see if it could be increased to protect the long range of the betty. maybe the land based zero could have a longer range than the carrier version.

showboat1 · Post by **showboat1** » Sun Jun 30, 2002 9:48 am

If memory serves me, Bettys often made unescorted attacks at their maximum range. They were also massacred in these attacks. The draw back is that, unlike reality, Bettys from Rabual cannot pick up fighter escort at Buin to go bomb Guadalcanal. That was a main reason for building up Buin and Bouganville.

GET TRANSPT · Post by **GET TRANSPT** » Mon Jul 01, 2002 12:25 pm

please no range changes. leave the bettys alone!

a solution for unescorted bettys is to pothem at NI after experience reaches 75 +. In order o getheir expericne up, train them and/or target their base targets to "land units" (almost no casualties compared to attacking air fields or supply depots). I youwnat to attack and allied airfiled, use a Surface trasport force, ot better yet, take the base.Thes serve to siolate teh abse and cost it supllies alos, killing grpund units forces the base to use supply rebuild in the ground units, which can't be used to rebuild air. I seldom attack airfields with LBA.

Do NOT base bettys too far out until experience is over 75, and never over CAP-heavy australia or india without A6M2 escort. 9 hexes (13 for base attacks) is too ambitious. Use Ki-49's and Ki-21's (i love that new six hex range) as front line bombers. Save bettys for mass attacks against CV forces.

deVada · Post by **deVada** » Mon Jul 01, 2002 2:45 pm

:rolleyes:
I agree that by the historical point of view Bettys should be left as they are, but isn't that the most entertaining to change history ?
Looking from perspective of 50 years since war ending while studying history of II WW aerial engagements I always think that Japanese constructors weren't too much competent and they didn't make right conclusions during the war.
If players can change strategical objectives of army operations why couldn't they press the constructors for ways of projecting planes ?
Sometimes I like to modify the 1944 scenario by :
adding powerful H10K ASW long range flying boat,
adding new class carriers with better durability and capacity,
adding more flak guns on DD's and CL's,
adding new I-410 subs with more accurate torpedoes,
trying to check if it will turn the tides in favor of Japan ...
Aren't We playing for pleasure ? The Japan will always loose when two human players meet. It is only a matter of time ...

GET TRANSPT · Post by **GET TRANSPT** » Mon Jul 01, 2002 6:30 pm

Good points, deVada. But gaming to me isn't all about who loses or wins, it's about playing (losing around 50%). Sure, the Japanese lose. But is it enjoyable? And one can always play the Allies after playing the Japanese. I certainly do, and it helps my sanity.

deVada · Post by **deVada** » Tue Jul 02, 2002 11:05 am

You're right. Not winning but playing is enjoyable.
Japanese victory in Pacific War is a way not a destination.
Best regards
Peter
:p

What 'bout a match ?
I could take the Empire and try to don't allow You to take it.
I'm always loosing after a fierce fighting ...

Betty Bombers

Betty Bombers

second solution for betty's problem

History vs Player's will

You're right