Matrix Games Forums

Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual previewThe fight for Armageddon begins! The Matrix Holiday sales are starting today!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Low naval attacks

 
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 >> Low naval attacks Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Low naval attacks - 5/12/2010 10:24:45 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
Can someone enlighten me please, I´ve noticed that my Marauders attack with reduced load (3x500lb bombs) at normal range when doing a low nav attack. I wondered why. Now in one of my last turns, my Mitchells flew a low nav attack at extended range and it looked like this:

Morning Air attack on TF, near Mussau Island at 104,118

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid spotted at 41 NM, estimated altitude 3,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 12 minutes


Allied aircraft
B-25C Mitchell x 6


Allied aircraft losses
B-25C Mitchell: 4 damaged

Japanese Ships
DD Samidare



Aircraft Attacking:
6 x B-25C Mitchell bombing from 1000 feet *
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 lb SAP Bomb




one bomb??? As far as I can see is that when my bombers do low nav attacks at normal range then they fly with their reduced load (50% of normal load) and when they attack at extended range they get their reduced load divided by two again (rounded down), resulting in a 1 bomb load. The bombers in this case were flying from a level 9 airfield and the others from a level 5, in both cases easisly enough for 2E bombers. Is this working as designed? I´ve gone through the manual twice again but couldn´t find anything on it using the search function.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 5/12/2010 10:25:39 AM >


_____________________________

Post #: 1
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/12/2010 11:10:32 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 9464
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: online
From a gameplay perspective, if a LBA which is not classed as an attack-bomber,and flies a low level mission, they fly with half the usual bomb load.

This was to help stop every LBA from becoming a low-level ship killer.
Only the LBAs classed as attack-bombers get to fly with the 'full' load appropriate to the range.

This change was made in Jan 2008 so it has been part of the base. If it never made it the manual, then it is my fault.

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 2
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/12/2010 11:33:12 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

From a gameplay perspective, if a LBA which is not classed as an attack-bomber,and flies a low level mission, they fly with half the usual bomb load.

This was to help stop every LBA from becoming a low-level ship killer.
Only the LBAs classed as attack-bombers get to fly with the 'full' load appropriate to the range.

This change was made in Jan 2008 so it has been part of the base. If it never made it the manual, then it is my fault.



thanks for the info michaelm. I haven´t gone through each page in the relevant sections one by one, I´ve only used the search function but couldn´t find it. With the support of the forum you don´t have to have everything in the manual anyway if it really isn´t in there. The forum rocks.

_____________________________


(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 3
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/12/2010 11:36:44 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 3970
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: vermont
Status: offline
quote:

From a gameplay perspective, if a LBA which is not classed as an attack-bomber,and flies a low level mission, they fly with half the usual bomb load.

This was to help stop every LBA from becoming a low-level ship killer.
Only the LBAs classed as attack-bombers get to fly with the 'full' load appropriate to the range.

This change was made in Jan 2008 so it has been part of the base. If it never made it the manual, then it is my fault.


Which apparently means that if one employs any USN land based bomber in the manner in which they were employed historically: masthead bombing, then the bomb load will be halved. That of course simulates the fact that Tokyo Rose reported that the decadent democrat sailors needed to have a full galley with ice cream and cold beer in one of the bomb bays.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 4
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/12/2010 12:02:27 PM   
Yakface

 

Posts: 716
Joined: 8/5/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence


decadent democrat sailors needed to have a full galley with ice cream and cold beer in one of the bomb bays.


Skip bombing with ice cream and beer......Christ - what a bloody mess that would make

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 5
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/12/2010 1:39:17 PM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface


quote:

ORIGINAL: spence


decadent democrat sailors needed to have a full galley with ice cream and cold beer in one of the bomb bays.


Skip bombing with ice cream and beer......Christ - what a bloody mess that would make


Tasty, though.

How do we know which planes qualify as attack bombers?

(in reply to Yakface)
Post #: 6
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/12/2010 1:49:13 PM   
ncdawg


Posts: 139
Joined: 7/28/2009
From: Raleigh NC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface


quote:

ORIGINAL: spence


decadent democrat sailors needed to have a full galley with ice cream and cold beer in one of the bomb bays.


Skip bombing with ice cream and beer......Christ - what a bloody mess that would make


Tasty, though.

How do we know which planes qualify as attack bombers?



AB = Attack Bomber. Just like DB = Dive Bomber. (At least that's what it says in the manual; however in the editor I don't see that "Attack Bomber" is a choice when you set the plane type).

Oops ! In the editor it's actually an option flag like designating a group as float capable.

< Message edited by ncdawg -- 5/12/2010 1:56:22 PM >

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 7
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/12/2010 2:05:00 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
guess most medium bombers won´t be attack bombers. What about the B-25H or G?

_____________________________


(in reply to ncdawg)
Post #: 8
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/12/2010 2:37:37 PM   
ckammp

 

Posts: 799
Joined: 5/30/2009
From: Rear Area training facility
Status: offline
Allied attack bombers:

A-20G    A-20A1    A-26B

B-25D1   B-25G    B-25H    B-25J11

PBJ-1H

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 9
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/12/2010 3:22:46 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

Allied attack bombers:

A-20G    A-20A1    A-26B

B-25D1   B-25G    B-25H    B-25J11

PBJ-1H



thanks for the info, glad to see all my 43+ B-25 being attack bombers...

_____________________________


(in reply to ckammp)
Post #: 10
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/12/2010 3:43:06 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline
I've got a lot of B-25D1's right now, and they always, every single time, strafe their target no matter what mission or elevation I put them at.  Is there some way to just get them to drop bombs?

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 11
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/12/2010 6:06:12 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4616
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline
Thats great info. Thanks a lot.

_____________________________

S**t happens in war.

All hail the superior ones!

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 12
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/12/2010 6:38:20 PM   
ecwgcx


Posts: 481
Joined: 9/14/2004
Status: offline
My A-20's will do nothing BUT strafe. That might be ok if they hit something once and a while but aside from a stray .50 cal hit their bombs are useless except to scare the plankton.

(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 13
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/12/2010 11:51:27 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 3970
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: vermont
Status: offline
quote:

Allied attack bombers:

A-20G A-20A1 A-26B

B-25D1 B-25G B-25H B-25J11

PBJ-1H


This list excludes all USN "level" bombers. It was USN doctrine to attack at MASTHEAD height with so called level bombers. One of the naval specifications for the PB4Y-2 Privateer was to remove the ball turret and the superchargers because the a/c was designed from the get-go to operate at low level. The turrets were laid out so that one PB4Y-2 could strafe the target with a 10 x .50 cal broadside while its mate made a bomb run.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 14
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/13/2010 2:51:58 AM   
ckammp

 

Posts: 799
Joined: 5/30/2009
From: Rear Area training facility
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

Allied attack bombers:

A-20G A-20A1 A-26B

B-25D1 B-25G B-25H B-25J11

PBJ-1H


This list excludes all USN "level" bombers. It was USN doctrine to attack at MASTHEAD height with so called level bombers. One of the naval specifications for the PB4Y-2 Privateer was to remove the ball turret and the superchargers because the a/c was designed from the get-go to operate at low level. The turrets were laid out so that one PB4Y-2 could strafe the target with a 10 x .50 cal broadside while its mate made a bomb run.



The list includes all plane types marked as being "Attack Bombers" in AE scenarios 1 and 2.

The PBJ-1H is an USN level bomber.

If you want to designate any other plane type as an attack bomber, simply use the editor.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 15
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/13/2010 6:50:46 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8252
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline
"The PBJ-1H is an USN level bomber. "

The PBJ (my favorite designation for any navy aircraft!) was the USN version of the B-25. Is the -1H the B-25H?


_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to ckammp)
Post #: 16
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/13/2010 8:27:06 AM   
ckammp

 

Posts: 799
Joined: 5/30/2009
From: Rear Area training facility
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

"The PBJ-1H is an USN level bomber. "

The PBJ (my favorite designation for any navy aircraft!) was the USN version of the B-25. Is the -1H the B-25H?




Yes, the PBJ-1H is the Navy version of the B-25H. AFAIK, the types were identical.


Edit. The PBJ-1D is the Navy version of the B-25D1, and the PBJ-1J is the Navy version of the B-25J11.
While both of these Navy plane types are in AE, neither is designated as "Attack Bombers", unlike the Army versions. The Navy modified the -1Ds and -1Js for more of an anti-sub role. If any player wishes to convert these plane types to become "Attack Bombers", it can be done in the editor.

< Message edited by ckammp -- 5/13/2010 8:54:57 AM >

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 17
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/13/2010 12:06:29 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 3970
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: vermont
Status: offline
quote:

If you want to ...[insert any Allied capability that is not matched or exceeded by the Japanese in this game]... simply use the editor.


Seems like this response is getting pretty routine.

(in reply to ckammp)
Post #: 18
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/13/2010 12:42:49 PM   
mike scholl 1

 

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

From a gameplay perspective, if a LBA which is not classed as an attack-bomber,and flies a low level mission, they fly with half the usual bomb load.

This was to help stop every LBA from becoming a low-level ship killer.
Only the LBAs classed as attack-bombers get to fly with the 'full' load appropriate to the range.




This is understandable from the "try to keep it real" point of view..., but WHY was nothing done about the Kate's "laser guided bombing" capability? I can't count the DD's I lost in the open ocean to Kate level bombers flying at 9-10,000 feet. While you were dealing with preventing the absurd, why not tackle both side's absurdities?

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 19
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/13/2010 1:29:38 PM   
michaelm


Posts: 9464
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: online
The aircraft itself has no bearing on if an air-launched weapon hits and causes damage.

The chances to hit are determined by the pilot skill and the weapon attributes like accuracy.


_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to mike scholl 1)
Post #: 20
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/14/2010 12:40:31 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 3970
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: vermont
Status: offline
It seems all torpedo bombers are armed with laser guided bombs (Allies too but their experience is lower so it is not quite as pronounced).

But laser guided bombs aside, I'd be very surprised if anybody can come up with enough successful torpedo attacks by Kates against any target during the entire course of the war to add up to even 1 dozen torpedo hits. As a start they scored 7 torpedo hits on 3 CVs (2 on Lexington, 2 on Yorktown, and 3 on Hornet)....The Midway fiasco was not a singular event. The KB's torpedo squadrons practiced the same debacle twice before June 4, 1942 and missed several opportunities to attack Allied ships as a result(the dive bombers saved KB's reputation). Nobody noticed the first two times but third time payed for all.

On the other hand PB4Ys and other USN level bombers sank scores if not hundreds of Japanese merchant ships with bombs making low level attacks.

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 21
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/14/2010 2:43:50 AM   
mike scholl 1

 

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

The aircraft itself has no bearing on if an air-launched weapon hits and causes damage.

The chances to hit are determined by the pilot skill and the weapon attributes like accuracy.




Aye.., and there's the rub. Kate crews were skilled and dedicated in the torpedo attack role (though not as successful as as the game would have you believe). But that doesn't mean diddly in the level bomber role (a role they only used to attack immobile targets, and with no great success).

By combining the "pilot skill" rating for "low level naval attack", we've created a monster. If this is the way the game is going to function, then the "pilot skill" ratings for naval attacks should AVERAGE the success ratings for torpedo attacks and low level naval bombing (Creating an overall reduction across the board). Instead we've taken the best possible interpretation and spread it across two totally different activities.

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 22
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/14/2010 3:41:21 AM   
Heeward


Posts: 316
Joined: 1/27/2003
From: Lacey Washington
Status: offline
Try training your aircraft at 100 ft they gain strafe experience. Fighters gain Strafe experience even if set on Sweep / Escort Training. Bombers set at Naval attack gain NavB and LowN. I suspect if set at Ground Attack they will gain GrdB and LowG experience. 

_____________________________

The Wake

(in reply to mike scholl 1)
Post #: 23
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/14/2010 4:01:40 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 15172
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

The aircraft itself has no bearing on if an air-launched weapon hits and causes damage.

The chances to hit are determined by the pilot skill and the weapon attributes like accuracy.




Aye.., and there's the rub. Kate crews were skilled and dedicated in the torpedo attack role (though not as successful as as the game would have you believe). But that doesn't mean diddly in the level bomber role (a role they only used to attack immobile targets, and with no great success).

By combining the "pilot skill" rating for "low level naval attack", we've created a monster. If this is the way the game is going to function, then the "pilot skill" ratings for naval attacks should AVERAGE the success ratings for torpedo attacks and low level naval bombing (Creating an overall reduction across the board). Instead we've taken the best possible interpretation and spread it across two totally different activities.



Not sure what you mean Mike - they are not combined in AE like they were in WITP. When you train a pilot in naval attack with torpedoes selected for the squadron, they train in torpedo skill, not in naval bombing and not in low naval bombing. As for the starting skills of the pilots, you could convince the scenario designer!

(in reply to mike scholl 1)
Post #: 24
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/14/2010 4:58:02 AM   
mike scholl 1

 

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Not sure what you mean Mike - they are not combined in AE like they were in WITP. When you train a pilot in naval attack with torpedoes selected for the squadron, they train in torpedo skill, not in naval bombing and not in low naval bombing. As for the starting skills of the pilots, you could convince the scenario designer!



I mean that (as michaelm states) pilot skill for Japanese torpedo bombers seems to be based on their skill with torpedoes, but is also making them incredibly effective in the naval bombing role. The skill ratings as "bombers" and "naval bombers" seem to have been "grandfathered in" based not on their performance as level bombers, but their skill as torpedo bombers.

Over and over again I've watched Kate level bombers getting 50% hits and more on moving DD's at sea. Which is about 10 times better than they did against anchored BB's at Pearl Harbor, and more than 100 times better than they ever did against moving targets in real life. It's a problem which should have been dealt with at the same time they were preventing over-exploitation of Allied "skip" bombers.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 25
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/14/2010 6:16:11 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 15172
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
I interpret what he said differently - I think he used the term pilot skill generically, and meant the appropriate pilot skills to whatever attack is being carried out.

(in reply to mike scholl 1)
Post #: 26
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/14/2010 7:21:22 AM   
CV Zuikaku

 

Posts: 437
Joined: 12/18/2008
From: Legrad, Croatia
Status: offline
Well, at the start of GC, many of the KB's Kate pilots have very high NavB skills. The main problem (or solution for Allied side) is they are mostly irreplacable, even with training programs. So as the time passes by and KB torpedo pilots get killed (and they are taking high casualties and life expectancy isn't too high), Kates do not have laser guided bombs anymore. I'm in late '43 as Japanese now, and my KB kates are not ship killers like they used to be. Level or torpedo bombing- they are rarely able to hit anything (except fat transports)....

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 27
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/14/2010 7:22:37 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Heeward

Try training your aircraft at 100 ft they gain strafe experience. Fighters gain Strafe experience even if set on Sweep / Escort Training. Bombers set at Naval attack gain NavB and LowN. I suspect if set at Ground Attack they will gain GrdB and LowG experience. 




I´ve never seen any oh my thousands pilots in training sweep/escort gain even one point for strafe.

_____________________________


(in reply to Heeward)
Post #: 28
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/14/2010 7:39:56 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 15172
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Heeward

Try training your aircraft at 100 ft they gain strafe experience. Fighters gain Strafe experience even if set on Sweep / Escort Training. Bombers set at Naval attack gain NavB and LowN. I suspect if set at Ground Attack they will gain GrdB and LowG experience. 


I´ve never seen any oh my thousands pilots in training sweep/escort gain even one point for strafe.


I have. Train fighters or fighter bombers on 'escort' at 100ft and they gain 'strafe' skill. Works every time for me.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 29
RE: Low naval attacks - 5/14/2010 9:02:30 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Heeward

Try training your aircraft at 100 ft they gain strafe experience. Fighters gain Strafe experience even if set on Sweep / Escort Training. Bombers set at Naval attack gain NavB and LowN. I suspect if set at Ground Attack they will gain GrdB and LowG experience. 


I´ve never seen any oh my thousands pilots in training sweep/escort gain even one point for strafe.


I have. Train fighters or fighter bombers on 'escort' at 100ft and they gain 'strafe' skill. Works every time for me.



oops, have missed the 100ft


_____________________________


(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Low naval attacks Page: [1] 2   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

0.207