Matrix Games Forums

Pandora: Eclipse of Nashira Announced! Deal of the Week: Command Ops goes half price!New Fronts are opening up for Commander: The Great WarCharacters of World War 1Sign of for the Pike and Shot Beta!More Games are Coming to Steam! Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great WarDeal of the Week Panzer Corps
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Catalina's over rated

 
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 >> The War Room >> Catalina's over rated Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Catalina's over rated - 2/12/2011 5:07:16 PM   
findmeifyoucan

 

Posts: 579
Joined: 10/14/2009
Status: offline
Someone explain to me how in the first week of the GC Scen 2, 4 Devastator torpedo bombers can miss my heavy carrier in the KB traveling at 30 knots and with just 3 Catalina's on my CVL traveling at 26 knots two out of the three torpedoes hit doing major damage?

Land based float planes are better for attacking naval ships with torpedoes than trained naval carrier pilots in actual real torpedo bomber planes?? roflmao
Post #: 1
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/12/2011 10:10:18 PM   
noguaranteeofsanity


Posts: 257
Joined: 11/24/2009
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
Really need more information before any one can comment, such as the combat report.

Also, what was the experience of the pilots involved? It is quite possible that the Naval Torpedoing (NavT) skill of the Catalina pilots, is just as high, or even higher, than the Naval Bombing (NavB) skill of the Devastator pilots.

Then what altitude did they attack at? The dive bombers might have been too high or low, to perform dive bombing attacks and instead, might of attacked using glide or level bombing, which are less accurate.

Another detail that might help, is the make up of the task forces, for example is the CVL sailing in the KB TF or in another TF?

Edit: I should drink my coffee before answering, apologies I confused devastators and SBDs.

< Message edited by noguaranteeofsanity -- 2/12/2011 11:49:45 PM >

(in reply to findmeifyoucan)
Post #: 2
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/12/2011 10:22:13 PM   
Smeulders

 

Posts: 1878
Joined: 8/9/2009
Status: offline
Air cover ? A Devastor dodging CAP might perform worse than a Catalina that gets a clear run.

_____________________________

The AE-Wiki, help fill it out

(in reply to noguaranteeofsanity)
Post #: 3
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/12/2011 10:22:25 PM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 694
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline
At this small scale (4 then 3 planes), your result is not statistically significant.  It's like throwing a bunch of dice, and you'd get four low results on the first set, and two high results on the second set (out of the same number of dice as in your example).  Despite all the details, research and complexity, the luck/random factor is still present, like IRL.

(in reply to noguaranteeofsanity)
Post #: 4
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/12/2011 11:07:58 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41344
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
If you were playing the other side, you'd be whining about how "over rated" the Emily was...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to findmeifyoucan)
Post #: 5
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/12/2011 11:11:53 PM   
findmeifyoucan

 

Posts: 579
Joined: 10/14/2009
Status: offline
Actually neither got a clear run. Seperate task forces and in both cases the Devistators and Catalina's had to deal with CAp, Zero's in both cases. It is not likely experience was a factor as it was only 2 days after Pearl Harbour so no real time to change pilot's for the better. lol

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 6
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/12/2011 11:23:10 PM   
Captain Cruft


Posts: 3648
Joined: 3/17/2004
From: England
Status: offline
The Catalinas and Mavises and Emilies all carry two torpedoes. So, I reckon that means that a 40 NavT pilot flying one of these crates is the equivalent of an 80 NavT pilot in a CV based torpedo bomber ... These patrol planes are all a lot harder to shoot down too.

(in reply to findmeifyoucan)
Post #: 7
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/12/2011 11:39:27 PM   
findmeifyoucan

 

Posts: 579
Joined: 10/14/2009
Status: offline
Details on these two battles are as follows,
10x Catalina's coming in on CVL TF at 7k feet against 12 Zero's Cap, 3 get through of which 2 out of 3 torpedoes hit for major damage. First of all 10 Catalina's with no escort getting through against 12 Zero's? Hello, is anyone out there???

11 F4f's, 24 Dauntless, 15 Devastator's coming in on KB TF with 30 Zero's CAP, 20 SBD's and 4 Devastator's get through, 7x sbd bomb at 4k feet, 13x sbd bomb at 2k feet and 4 Devastator's at 200 feet.

Just one bomb hit and no torpedoes hit at all. Not that I am complaining or anything being Japanese but it just does not make sense to me. Especially at the beginning of the war when the Americans have virtually no experience. Dec 9, 41. Common on now. Let's get serious here.

(in reply to findmeifyoucan)
Post #: 8
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/13/2011 12:04:46 AM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 694
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline
Leaking CAP is a feature that was much sought after.  And it's normal.  And if you had played WitP earlier, you'd be happy to see that, because it means that later in the war, your kamikazes will be able to get through multi-hundred Hellcats CAP.

And as said above : Catalinas have two torpedoes each, so they shot SIX of them, and hit twice : hit rate of 33%, which is not extraordinary.  The Devastators have 0 ?  Well, both have four misses.  Against warships, a missing torpedo is the rule rather than the exception, and it's respected here.

It was a good attack, yes, but not unrealistic.  And as I said : with such small numbers involved, anything can happen, and you certainly can't conclude that the PBYs are over-rated.

(in reply to findmeifyoucan)
Post #: 9
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/13/2011 12:29:54 AM   
vettim89


Posts: 3307
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: findmeifyoucan

Details on these two battles are as follows,
10x Catalina's coming in on CVL TF at 7k feet against 12 Zero's Cap, 3 get through of which 2 out of 3 torpedoes hit for major damage. First of all 10 Catalina's with no escort getting through against 12 Zero's? Hello, is anyone out there???

11 F4f's, 24 Dauntless, 15 Devastator's coming in on KB TF with 30 Zero's CAP, 20 SBD's and 4 Devastator's get through, 7x sbd bomb at 4k feet, 13x sbd bomb at 2k feet and 4 Devastator's at 200 feet.

Just one bomb hit and no torpedoes hit at all. Not that I am complaining or anything being Japanese but it just does not make sense to me. Especially at the beginning of the war when the Americans have virtually no experience. Dec 9, 41. Common on now. Let's get serious here.


Three points:

First the above post about random events generating odd results hit the nail on the head. You could try this battle 100 times and never see similar results. For example, we know if you flip a coin 1000 times you will get darn close to 500 heads and 500 tails; however, flip that coin only ten times and you may very well get eight heads and two tails. Small sample sizes can really screw up statistics. Don't forget the IJN had no radar and most of there planes had no radios. I could foresee a set of circumstances where the bulk of the CAP got caught on the wrong side of the TF and was unable to intercept the PBY's

Second is I take umbrage at the title of your thread. Quite frankly I am getting a little tired of people posting on how this is broke or that is overpowered, etc. etc. etc. based on one battle. Put the Battle of Savo Island or Kula Gulf into an AE style combat report and tell me what it looks like (Hint: go look over in the WiTP Forum for posts by a guy named Knavey). Certainly we all are interested in seeing some of the quirky little combat results the game throws at us, but I for one would like these things presented as "Hey, look what happened" or "You'll never beleive this" rather than, "This game is borked". The Devs put a lot of time into this project for no remuneration. I think we owe them a level of respect when we address issues.

Lastly, your comment about the neophyte USN is off base IMHO. Yes, the pilots of the KB were trained to a high level. The USN flight training was not far behind. The first aircraft carrier of the war sunk by opposing aircraft from an enemy carrier was Japanese not American (Shoho). The first carrier vs carrier battle saw the USN give almost as good as it took (especially considering that many believe Lexington would have been saved if DC methods developed later in the war had been in place). Through the first two CV vs CV battles the IJN lost four CV and a CVL balance by two CV for the USN. Japan ran amok the first six months of the war because the forces against them were ill-equipped, ill-trained, and poorly supported. Once they met an evenly matched foe that was well supported they were first blunted then turned back.

JOMHO

(Edit: fighting a two day long headache - meds made for some sloppy grammar/spelling)

< Message edited by vettim89 -- 2/13/2011 1:24:53 AM >


_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to findmeifyoucan)
Post #: 10
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/13/2011 12:30:56 AM   
Erkki


Posts: 1423
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline
What other ships were there in the TF?

Those Catalinas are so slow and as they have to approach at the deck, you'd think crossfire from the CVL and 3-4 DDs would cut them apart. How many escorts did it have? I often see good part of the attacks going after DDs and such when there'd be a CV, presumably because these ships position themselves between the attack and high-value targets. AFAIK it was standard tactics to place a DD where the torpedo should be dropped at its extreme ranges. Any closer and the bomber would have to fly over the DD and all its guns.

< Message edited by Erkki -- 2/13/2011 12:31:10 AM >

(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 11
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/13/2011 3:13:08 AM   
AW1Steve


Posts: 12813
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: ME-FL-NE-IL ?
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

If you were playing the other side, you'd be whining about how "over rated" the Emily was...



INDEED!

_____________________________

"Geezerhood is a state of mind, attained by being largely out of yours". AW1Steve

"Quit whining and play the game. Or go home". My 7th grade baseball coach. It applies well to WITP AE players.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 12
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/13/2011 4:38:17 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 17856
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline
Emily.....

_____________________________


(in reply to AW1Steve)
Post #: 13
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/13/2011 6:10:31 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 8316
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Emily.....


A ballet dancer I knoew whan I was 19-YO . . .

Emilyyyyyyyy.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 14
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/13/2011 6:13:20 PM   
stuman


Posts: 3864
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Emily.....


A ballet dancer I knoew whan I was 19-YO . . .

Emilyyyyyyyy.


I bet your Emily was more fun

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 15
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/13/2011 7:11:01 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 8316
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman


I bet your Emily was more fun


Except when she kicked. That hurt.

She married and went to grad school with a friend of mine. Had a kid. Afterward, wow. Just wow. I didn't know skin could stretch like that . . .

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to stuman)
Post #: 16
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/13/2011 9:17:19 PM   
PresterJohn


Posts: 353
Joined: 8/11/2009
Status: offline
A little harsh on the OP i think. Catalinas on torpedo attack do seem overly effective, as are for that matter Emilys. As a Japanese player i occasionally use Emilys as attack planes, i don't bother training their Naval torp skill(ie its below 40) and i get a decent number of hits.

A semi decent CAP stops Emilys and Catalinas, and both plane types are too valuable to use reguarly in the attack role.

< Message edited by PresterJohn -- 2/13/2011 10:02:34 PM >

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 17
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/14/2011 5:32:53 AM   
crsutton


Posts: 7043
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Yes, I found the cats to be a bit too accurate and deadly with the torpedoes. Problem is that using them on torpedo attack causes you to burn through them quite quickly and you don't get many replacments. I used them a few times with sucess in my games but my opponents just starting setting CAP traps for them and I gave it up. They are just too important as patrol planes to use as attack bombers. Emilys are the same. I relish the opportunity to shoot them down.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to PresterJohn)
Post #: 18
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/14/2011 11:39:02 AM   
HansBolter


Posts: 3460
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Yes, I found the cats to be a bit too accurate and deadly with the torpedoes. Problem is that using them on torpedo attack causes you to burn through them quite quickly and you don't get many replacments. I used them a few times with sucess in my games but my opponents just starting setting CAP traps for them and I gave it up. They are just too important as patrol planes to use as attack bombers. Emilys are the same. I relish the opportunity to shoot them down.



Exactly my experiences. The ones in the PI are great for attacking the landing TFs that have little air cover on the first few turns. As they start encountering CAP the attrition rate quickly empties the pool and the allied player is forced to convert them to to search operations.

The need to replenish the squads at Pearl and distribute air search cover across the shipping lanes to OZ is too great for the allied player to be able to afford to feed the daily replacement rate into units constantly attrited from naval attack missions.


p.s. I disagree with your quote. Some people, like me, have an inherent need to whine. We cannot be happy without it. I typically whine loudest when I am winning and whine the most while I'm winning. Nonwhiners just have no concept and are clueless when it comes to understanding whiners. The types that whine only when losing are rank amatuers that give true whiners a bad name.



< Message edited by HansBolter -- 2/14/2011 11:44:14 AM >


_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 19
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/14/2011 4:26:33 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 7043
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
"I whine therefore I am" Descartes

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 20
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/14/2011 5:51:34 PM   
Nomad


Posts: 4368
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: Northern Rockies
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

"I whine therefore I am" Descartes


Would you like some cheese to go with that Whine?

_____________________________



Don't ask me any questions, apparently I know nothing about WitP:AE

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 21
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/14/2011 8:30:45 PM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8251
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline
A nice Port Salut will do just fine, thank you...

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Nomad)
Post #: 22
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/14/2011 8:43:51 PM   
ChickenOfTheSea


Posts: 579
Joined: 6/7/2008
From: Virginia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

If you were playing the other side, you'd be whining about how "over rated" the Emily was...



INDEED!


I would never have believed Steve's bad luck with Miss Emily if I hadn't seen it for myself the second time it happened to him. He had me completely on the run in 1000 Mile War and in desperation I thought "If it worked for Chickenboy, maybe it will work for me." I couldn't believe it.

_____________________________

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice, there is. - Manfred Eigen

(in reply to AW1Steve)
Post #: 23
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/14/2011 9:16:48 PM   
oldman45


Posts: 2239
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: online
Well I for one never whine about emily, its the nells and bettys that get me whining

oh, and we can't forget missy, sarah, robin, joann. I think thats all of them now.

_____________________________


(in reply to ChickenOfTheSea)
Post #: 24
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/15/2011 1:10:28 AM   
vettim89


Posts: 3307
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Well I for one never whine about emily, its the nells and bettys that get me whining

oh, and we can't forget missy, sarah, robin, joann. I think thats all of them now.


Channeling your best Lou Bega?

"A little bit of Monica in my life ....."

< Message edited by vettim89 -- 2/15/2011 8:22:42 PM >


_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 25
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/16/2011 8:26:06 PM   
findmeifyoucan

 

Posts: 579
Joined: 10/14/2009
Status: offline
I actually had good escorts with that CVL like a BB, 2x CL's and about 6 DD's. lol

(in reply to vettim89)
Post #: 26
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/18/2011 5:56:38 PM   
CV2

 

Posts: 168
Joined: 11/4/2010
Status: offline
Date is 21 Dec 41 (all 3 attacks on this date). Note PBYs start with torp attack experience under 20. These aircraft are launching from Bataan a level 1 airfield level 2 port (note: naval attack airstrikes can not launch from a level 1 airfield and if using port size as airfield size for the Cats, a level 2 would cause a reduced bomb load). No AV/AVD/AVP is in the hex.

Case 1) 4 PBYs attack a ship in thunderstorms and get 3 hits.
Case 2) 5 PBYs attack a DD and a small patrol boat and get 1 hit.
Case 3) (my favorite) 8 PBYs attack a TF with fighter cover and still manage 4 hits.

My questions are these:
Number 1. Why were these raids allowed to fly to begin with? No AV type ships in the hex and only a level 1 airfield (granted PBYs dont use airfields, but still).
Number 2. Why were these planes carrying torpedoes? No AV type ships in the hex and no HQs with torps in the PI and yet they are carrying torps on strikes.
Number 3. Why are pilots with 20 or less torpedo experience hitting with such deadly accuracy?
Number 4. How is it an 8 plane strike that gets intercepted and loses 1 plane with at least 2 more damaged (since only 5 attacked) manage 80% hits? Average experience for that fighter unit is 72. The lowest 4 experienced pilots (assuming these 4 made the intercept) is 70, 70, 69, and 66.
Number 5. (actually a repeat of number 2) Where are these planes getting their torpedoes? They should at BEST be flying with reduced loads.

Now the up side of this of course is the allies have a very limited number of Cats. While the Japanese player can build as many Emilys as he wants. I have just doubled my Emily factories in this game.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Morning Air attack on TF, near Catanduanes at 83,81

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid spotted at 28 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 17 minutes


Allied aircraft
PBY-4 Catalina x 4


No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
AK Sakura Maru, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk


Aircraft Attacking:
4 x PBY-4 Catalina launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 22in Mk 13 Torpedo

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Catanduanes at 83,81

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid spotted at 21 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 12 minutes


Allied aircraft
PBY-4 Catalina x 5


No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
DD Asagiri
PB Kantori Maru, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk

Aircraft Attacking:
5 x PBY-4 Catalina launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 22in Mk 13 Torpedo

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Taytay at 75,81

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 24 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 14 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 4

Allied aircraft
PBY-4 Catalina x 8

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
PBY-4 Catalina: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged

Japanese Ships
xAK Nissen Maru, Torpedo hits 4, and is sunk
xAKL Kembu Maru

Japanese ground losses:
515 casualties reported
Squads: 22 destroyed, 6 disabled
Non Combat: 9 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled



Aircraft Attacking:
4 x PBY-4 Catalina launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 22in Mk 13 Torpedo
1 x PBY-4 Catalina launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 22in Mk 13 Torpedo

CAP engaged:
Yamada Det S-2 with A6M2 Zero (4 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 24000
Raid is overhead


< Message edited by CV2 -- 2/18/2011 6:16:46 PM >

(in reply to findmeifyoucan)
Post #: 27
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/18/2011 7:57:20 PM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 694
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CV2

Date is 21 Dec 41 (all 3 attacks on this date). Note PBYs start with torp attack experience under 20. These aircraft are launching from Bataan a level 1 airfield level 2 port (note: naval attack airstrikes can not launch from a level 1 airfield and if using port size as airfield size for the Cats, a level 2 would cause a reduced bomb load). No AV/AVD/AVP is in the hex.

Case 1) 4 PBYs attack a ship in thunderstorms and get 3 hits.
Case 2) 5 PBYs attack a DD and a small patrol boat and get 1 hit.
Case 3) (my favorite) 8 PBYs attack a TF with fighter cover and still manage 4 hits.

My questions are these:
[...]

Now the up side of this of course is the allies have a very limited number of Cats. While the Japanese player can build as many Emilys as he wants. I have just doubled my Emily factories in this game.


Well, I suspect the rate of hits is linked to the number of torpedoes carried. Just mod a test-scenario with two torpedoes on Nells or Betties, and a low torpedo skill, and see what it gives as a result.
BTW, 3 attacks with a total of 17 planes is again too small a set to deduce any conclusion...

As to your questions:
quote:

Number 1. Why were these raids allowed to fly to begin with? No AV type ships in the hex and only a level 1 airfield (granted PBYs dont use airfields, but still).

AV type ships and AV squads are not a requisite for launching missions, but to repair the planes. You can fly them from an AV-less base, but they'll all end up damaged, eventually.

quote:

Number 2. Why were these planes carrying torpedoes? No AV type ships in the hex and no HQs with torps in the PI and yet they are carrying torps on strikes.
Number 5. (actually a repeat of number 2) Where are these planes getting their torpedoes? They should at BEST be flying with reduced loads.

Air and Command HQ may allow the use of torpedoes by any squadron within their command radius.

quote:

Number 3. Why are pilots with 20 or less torpedo experience hitting with such deadly accuracy?
Number 4. How is it an 8 plane strike that gets intercepted and loses 1 plane with at least 2 more damaged (since only 5 attacked) manage 80% hits? Average experience for that fighter unit is 72. The lowest 4 experienced pilots (assuming these 4 made the intercept) is 70, 70, 69, and 66.

See above : I suspect that the number of hits is high because 1) your test sample is small, and 2) because the number of torpedoes carried. This is the same problem as the skip-bombing : lower-XP pilots with B-17 will hit much more than equally low-XP pilots with A-20, because the former holds much more bombs than the latter.

(in reply to CV2)
Post #: 28
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/18/2011 9:19:40 PM   
CV2

 

Posts: 168
Joined: 11/4/2010
Status: offline
Has anyone ever seen a strike of PBYs not score a hit? I cant say that I have.





Ever.






And I have played AE for 3 or 4 years now.

(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 29
RE: Catalina's over rated - 2/18/2011 10:13:06 PM   
USS America


Posts: 16074
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Apex, NC, USA
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: CV2

Has anyone ever seen a strike of PBYs not score a hit? I cant say that I have.





Ever.






And I have played AE for 3 or 4 years now.


Yes, more than once in our current PBEM game, up to late March '42. We've had some good hits as well, but still plenty of misses.

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me


Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to CV2)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> Catalina's over rated 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

0.117