Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!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 preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Japanese TBs

 
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 >> Japanese TBs Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Japanese TBs - 12/7/2012 12:33:05 PM   
Chris H

 

Posts: 3800
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Bexhill-on-Sea, E Sussex
Status: online
Other than the Kates MAD capability in 1944 is there any other reason to produce them as well as the Jill.
Post #: 1
RE: Japanese TBs - 12/7/2012 12:42:46 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4719
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

Other than the Kates MAD capability in 1944 is there any other reason to produce them as well as the Jill.

For that reason, I produce them ... no other.

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to Chris H)
Post #: 2
RE: Japanese TBs - 12/7/2012 1:00:58 PM   
Chris H

 

Posts: 3800
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Bexhill-on-Sea, E Sussex
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

Other than the Kates MAD capability in 1944 is there any other reason to produce them as well as the Jill.

For that reason, I produce them ... no other.


My thoughts as well. Thanks

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 3
RE: Japanese TBs - 12/7/2012 5:03:58 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 7426
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
I would not expect too much from MAD anyways. Don't know if I would build a plane specifically for that capability anyhow. Frankly, the Japanese player's aircraft are very effective vs subs without it as long as they are well trained and used in numbers. As the Allied player in a long campaign, up until the introduction of the super E class ship in stock, 75% of my opponent's sub kills came from air dropped bombs. I think bomb load and range in an aircraft are far more important to killing subs than MAD would be.

My opinion anyways.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Chris H)
Post #: 4
RE: Japanese TBs - 12/7/2012 6:47:20 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 18493
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

Other than the Kates MAD capability in 1944 is there any other reason to produce them as well as the Jill.


Can't the Grace be used as either a DB or TB? Granted, she won't be available until later in 1944, but that flexibility is very useful, IMO. I will research her in order to have a late war option like this too.

But yes-the B5N2 is largely supplanted by B6N airframes when they become available.

_____________________________


(in reply to Chris H)
Post #: 5
RE: Japanese TBs - 12/8/2012 3:07:03 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5925
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
IJ MAD only adds 5% to ASW.  I have no documentation if 5% is big or tiny, but I really don't notice any difference between Helen 1a's equipped with MAD and Helen 11's on ASW duty in my games.  I see bigger impacts from pilot training.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 6
RE: Japanese TBs - 12/8/2012 4:46:29 AM   
crsutton


Posts: 7426
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
It really was not a very effective device. In order to be effective the pilot had to fly very low (10 meters) and the device could be thwarted by electronic counter measures. And to effectively cover a convoy six planes had to be sweeping ahead of the convoy at all times.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 7
RE: Japanese TBs - 12/8/2012 8:11:56 AM   
SenToku

 

Posts: 57
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline
If ASW plane with MAD is wanted, wouldn't Ki-49-Ia be better? Longer range than Kate.

But I was wondering how to sink more subs by aircraft than surface forces? I seem to sink about 75% with hunter/killer surface groups.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 8
RE: Japanese TBs - 12/8/2012 8:34:57 AM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4616
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

IJ MAD only adds 5% to ASW.  I have no documentation if 5% is big or tiny, but I really don't notice any difference between Helen 1a's equipped with MAD and Helen 11's on ASW duty in my games.  I see bigger impacts from pilot training.


Pax, just out of interest, where did you get the 5% from? I never knew any value. Only a vague "it improves ASW a bit".

_____________________________

S**t happens in war.

All hail the superior ones!

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 9
RE: Japanese TBs - 12/8/2012 8:39:37 AM   
Chris H

 

Posts: 3800
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Bexhill-on-Sea, E Sussex
Status: online
I'm only Nov 1942 so I have no knowlege of how effective MAD is.  From all accounts not very and there are other a/c with better range and bomb load out there that also have MAD.  I shall reconsider.

(in reply to SenToku)
Post #: 10
RE: Japanese TBs - 12/8/2012 2:43:39 PM   
sandman455


Posts: 203
Joined: 7/5/2011
From: 20 yrs ago - SDO -> med down, w/BC glasses on
Status: offline
Since air ASW is directly related to long-term operations any increase in percentage of successful attacks will add up. I have no clue as to the percentage increase but even it it was just 1-2% better chance per attack, you are still going to compound this day after day, month after month. You might have a hard time seeing it within the game, but if you had the time to research the results the benefits of employing AC with MAD "should" be apparent over the long-term.

_____________________________

Gary S (USN 1320, 1985-1993)
AOCS 1985, VT10 1985-86, VT86 1986, VS41 1986-87
VS32 1987-90 (NSO/NWTO, deployed w/CV-66, CVN-71)
VS27 1990-91 (NATOPS/Safety)
SFWSLANT 1991-93 (AGM-84 All platforms, S-3 A/B systems)

(in reply to Chris H)
Post #: 11
RE: Japanese TBs - 12/8/2012 3:07:54 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5925
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

IJ MAD only adds 5% to ASW.  I have no documentation if 5% is big or tiny, but I really don't notice any difference between Helen 1a's equipped with MAD and Helen 11's on ASW duty in my games.  I see bigger impacts from pilot training.


Pax, just out of interest, where did you get the 5% from? I never knew any value. Only a vague "it improves ASW a bit".

In the editor ... under devices ... it shows "5" and I think I asked once if that was a constant or percentage and I was told percentage ... assuming my memory is working.


_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 12
RE: Japanese TBs - 12/8/2012 3:15:45 PM   
SenToku

 

Posts: 57
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sandman455

Since air ASW is directly related to long-term operations any increase in percentage of successful attacks will add up. I have no clue as to the percentage increase but even it it was just 1-2% better chance per attack, you are still going to compound this day after day, month after month. You might have a hard time seeing it within the game, but if you had the time to research the results the benefits of employing AC with MAD "should" be apparent over the long-term.



I think range is more important than MAD. The manual claims that running long range patrol planes at shorter than max range will also increase chances of detection. B5N2 is short range plane, in ASW patrol you get 3.5 hexes of range, which means there is not much room for reduction. With longer range planes, such as G3M3 you can either cover larger area than Kate or same area with better chances of detection.

One question; Does running a ASW patrol at 0 - range work? Like defending a Port? If it does, I have finally figured what to do with F1M1s. Also, any idea how large the "increase of detection chances" really is?

(in reply to sandman455)
Post #: 13
RE: Japanese TBs - 12/8/2012 8:28:27 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4616
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

IJ MAD only adds 5% to ASW.  I have no documentation if 5% is big or tiny, but I really don't notice any difference between Helen 1a's equipped with MAD and Helen 11's on ASW duty in my games.  I see bigger impacts from pilot training.


Pax, just out of interest, where did you get the 5% from? I never knew any value. Only a vague "it improves ASW a bit".

In the editor ... under devices ... it shows "5" and I think I asked once if that was a constant or percentage and I was told percentage ... assuming my memory is working.



Thanks!

_____________________________

S**t happens in war.

All hail the superior ones!

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 14
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Japanese TBs 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

0.086