Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Kamikazes

 
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 >> Kamikazes Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Kamikazes - 3/26/2018 6:12:52 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 16836
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Has anyone used kamikazes effectively in the latest beta patch?

Has anyone beat off an Allied invasion with kamikaze strikes?

I have seen mentioned the use of recon planes as kamikazes with some success...

Is there any recent game featuring the use of the Tsurugi or Toka or Kikka?

I used the Myojo against Tiemanj with some success pretty much limited to CVEs.

What other planes do people use...Oscar IV, Nick FB, Helen, Peggy, Judy and Jill...any other big contenders? Frank A?

Post #: 1
RE: Kamikazes - 3/27/2018 3:24:42 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8647
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
I haven't tested for a while, but I don't think any of the beta changes after I tested changed much. And, I don't think plane models specifically matter as much as tactics, and counter-tactics used by the player(s). Of course model selection is ONE part of any tactic, I just mean it isn't by itself over-arching.

Against the AI, it isn't too hard to penetrate the Death Star CAP. Numbers always work and the AI does not use aggressive counter-tactics. Players though do. So H2H testing is a lot different.

In H2H the biggest issue is range for me. If the allies do a good job of recon, then they will know where your assembly bases are and can neutralize them, particularly if they are coastal bases. So, this means using kami's from atolls is very problematic. Defending atolls is problematic at best anyway, right?
so thinking about Hokkaido, using the northern Honshu bases, they are 6 - 8 hexes away from Kushiro. Anything that can't attain that range is more vulnerable as it has to base from Hokkaido. Compounding this, Hokkaido only has one non-coastal base (Ashikawa sp?), so it is a prime target for both recon and neutralization. Then as you will likely park your KB behind Hokkaido, you need fighters with range to LRCAP it. Again, not on Hokkaido due to vulnerability.

Range, Speed, bomb load, DUR is what I look for in that order. Numbers will matter, so 2E is not my choice as you get 2x1E for each 2E. Just cost issue. Twice the engine factories to achieve is a big cost.

As for the "BIG" strike, all my testing suggests this doesn't really matter as much as actually getting all of the aircraft to fly. 1 big strike versus 100 small strikes will inflict about the same damage, losses roughly the same. Huge variance here, so impossible to quantify better. in the 100 strike scenario, initial strike losses are high, but the later strikes get through as the CAP wears down and the AA is expended (especially this, by the 30th raid, hardly any AA which is a BIG deal)

EDITED to correct chaotic writing

< Message edited by PaxMondo -- 3/27/2018 3:36:36 PM >


_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2
RE: Kamikazes - 3/27/2018 3:39:17 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 16836
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
In general Allies fear kamikazes,but in practice they accomplish almost nothing in VP terms.

Of all the standard, non fighter kamikazes, it seems Judy is the best combination of payload and speed and early arrival.

The faster Toka and her Army sister plane might be better anti-invasion defense...but doubtful as so very few games against players ever see them used and they suffer from land based use only. But if there is a glimmer of hope, it is the Tsurugi B. Fast, hard hitting, and an Army bomber. By r&d'ing the A plane first, it is possible to field the plane in very late 1944.

The Jill is slow. Twin engine planes are expensive. Fighters are needed elsewhere.


(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3
RE: Kamikazes - 3/27/2018 10:35:38 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8647
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

In general Allies fear kamikazes,but in practice they accomplish almost nothing in VP terms.

Of all the standard, non fighter kamikazes, it seems Judy is the best combination of payload and speed and early arrival.

The faster Toka and her Army sister plane might be better anti-invasion defense...but doubtful as so very few games against players ever see them used and they suffer from land based use only. But if there is a glimmer of hope, it is the Tsurugi B. Fast, hard hitting, and an Army bomber. By r&d'ing the A plane first, it is possible to field the plane in very late 1944.

The Jill is slow. Twin engine planes are expensive. Fighters are needed elsewhere.



On VP terms, I would agree. If you can kill enough AKA/AP's, CVE's ... you can really impact the allied amphib abiity.
Against a player, taking on the Death Star is a low percentage attack. In H2H testing, it is too easy to keep the DS out of range and still support amphib. No reason to bring it clos
Tsurugi A/B are both good, sure the extra 35 is good on the speed. But that 5 range puts them so close, you really have to know the LZ which in most cases means the allies know which bases you are going to use to defend from ....

Everything else I agree with. Judy comes early enough that you can build an inventory. Y3/Y4 are the models I now build out extensively; 7/8 range with a 500kg bomb and they use an engine that you likely have a large surplus capacity beginning in '44.


< Message edited by PaxMondo -- 3/27/2018 10:39:08 PM >


_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 4
RE: Kamikazes - 4/4/2018 2:00:26 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4159
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Has anyone used kamikazes effectively in the latest beta patch?

Has anyone beat off an Allied invasion with kamikaze strikes?

I have seen mentioned the use of recon planes as kamikazes with some success...

Is there any recent game featuring the use of the Tsurugi or Toka or Kikka?

I used the Myojo against Tiemanj with some success pretty much limited to CVEs.

What other planes do people use...Oscar IV, Nick FB, Helen, Peggy, Judy and Jill...any other big contenders? Frank A?




MrKane is using Tsurugi on me with some effect. Those planes are pretty fragile to flak.



_____________________________


(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 5
RE: Kamikazes - 4/5/2018 3:54:34 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 5483
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
quote:

Tsurugi A/B are both good, sure the extra 35 is good on the speed. But that 5 range puts them so close, you really have to know the LZ which in most cases means the allies know which bases you are going to use to defend from ....


Can't you 'stage' and then strike in the same turn like other air units?

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 6
RE: Kamikazes - 4/5/2018 3:55:56 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 5483
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
quote:

Those planes are pretty fragile to flak.


All Japanese aircraft are 'fragile' to late war Allied flak.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 7
RE: Kamikazes - 4/5/2018 4:36:50 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 6419
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: online
I recently lost a British CVE to three Kamikaze strikes by Ritas, but it wasn't enough to prevent the invasion from landing successfully.

In my scenario 40 game the AI seems to like using Rita and Mavis, but most of its Kamikaze strikes are coming form long range so that is likely affecting the airframe choice.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 8
RE: Kamikazes - 4/6/2018 1:14:16 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8647
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Tsurugi A/B are both good, sure the extra 35 is good on the speed. But that 5 range puts them so close, you really have to know the LZ which in most cases means the allies know which bases you are going to use to defend from ....


Can't you 'stage' and then strike in the same turn like other air units?

Yes, with the requisite checks to be passed. The point being if the staging location is known or guessed, then ....
Using Hokkaido as the example, that works great from Honshu, but Tsurugi can't reach from Honshu.

My experience in stage/strike same turn ... for non-offensive missions like CAP/NavSearch/etc it readily works. For offensive missions ... not as dependable.
That drives up the risk on an already moderately high risk mission. I mean if they launch, you just lost 4000 VP's and you hope for maybe 2000 VP of key ship damage and maybe 1000 VP of his airframes.
But, if your mission gets stuck on the ground at your staging and he has it targetted, which my H2H testing says is a safe bet, you just lost a LOT of airframes and VP's for nothing.

Just my thoughts ... if you have secret sauce for offensive missions to always go on a same turn stage/attack, please share.


_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 9
RE: Kamikazes - 4/6/2018 1:26:18 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 16836
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Tsurugi A/B are both good, sure the extra 35 is good on the speed. But that 5 range puts them so close, you really have to know the LZ which in most cases means the allies know which bases you are going to use to defend from ....


Can't you 'stage' and then strike in the same turn like other air units?

Yes, with the requisite checks to be passed. The point being if the staging location is known or guessed, then ....
Using Hokkaido as the example, that works great from Honshu, but Tsurugi can't reach from Honshu.

My experience in stage/strike same turn ... for non-offensive missions like CAP/NavSearch/etc it readily works. For offensive missions ... not as dependable.
That drives up the risk on an already moderately high risk mission. I mean if they launch, you just lost 4000 VP's and you hope for maybe 2000 VP of key ship damage and maybe 1000 VP of his airframes.
But, if your mission gets stuck on the ground at your staging and he has it targetted, which my H2H testing says is a safe bet, you just lost a LOT of airframes and VP's for nothing.

Just my thoughts ... if you have secret sauce for offensive missions to always go on a same turn stage/attack, please share.



The secret sauce is not AV support at the transported base, but rather how far the squadron had to fly to relocate as a percentage of their total travel ability. The further they travel, the less likely they will sortie.

Of course stacking limits, dl, HQa, leadership,weather, etc all play their part.

Plus switching from day to night or the opposite is never good for a relocate and attack (or even CAP).

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 10
RE: Kamikazes - 4/6/2018 1:37:59 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 16836
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

I recently lost a British CVE to three Kamikaze strikes by Ritas, but it wasn't enough to prevent the invasion from landing successfully.

In my scenario 40 game the AI seems to like using Rita and Mavis, but most of its Kamikaze strikes are coming form long range so that is likely affecting the airframe choice.


Using 4E bombers is really harsh economically for a player to use.

I am starting to think the Tsurugi B in a PDU on game is perhaps one of the potentially more important planes to research.

Patsy might be decent too and give better, longer strikes than say Nells.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 11
RE: Kamikazes - 4/6/2018 3:52:55 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 5483
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
quote:

Just my thoughts ... if you have secret sauce for offensive missions to always go on a same turn stage/attack, please share.


No, my experience/observations are similar to yours.

quote:

The secret sauce is not AV support at the transported base, but rather how far the squadron had to fly to relocate as a percentage of their total travel ability. The further they travel, the less likely they will sortie.


I have noticed this as well.

quote:

I am starting to think the Tsurugi B in a PDU on game is perhaps one of the potentially more important planes to research.

Patsy might be decent too and give better, longer strikes than say Nells.


Shhh! Don't give away all the 'secret sauce'.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 12
RE: Kamikazes - 4/7/2018 3:43:31 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8647
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
Which gets back to the short legs of the Tsurugi ... only 14 hex max relocation range ... so even a short hop from Honshu to Hokkaido is a big percentage of its range ... and then only 5 hexes ... if it was a few more hexes ... all the JFB's would be riding.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 13
RE: Kamikazes - 4/7/2018 12:12:33 PM   
MrKane


Posts: 743
Joined: 3/9/2013
From: West Poland
Status: offline
8 hex normal range and over 330mph speed is minimum in my opinion.

Here is example from my last turn. :

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Kaishu at 102,48

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 167 NM, estimated altitude 32,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 41 minutes

Japanese aircraft
N1K2-J George x 31
Ki-43-IV Oscar x 47
Ki-100-II Tony x 47

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-43-IV Oscar: 30 destroyed
Ki-43-IV Oscar: 2 destroyed by flak

Allied Ships
APA Latimer, Kamikaze hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
LCI(G)-437, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
APA Mountrail, Kamikaze hits 1
APA Telfair, Kamikaze hits 2, on fire
LSM(R)-194, Kamikaze hits 2, and is sunk
LSM(R)-195, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
APA Drew, Kamikaze hits 1, heavy damage
APA Oxford, Kamikaze hits 1
APA Eastland, Kamikaze hits 1
APA Sarasota, Kamikaze hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G)-405, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LCI(G)-408
APA La Porte, Kamikaze hits 1
APA Marvin McIntyre, Kamikaze hits 6, heavy fires, heavy damage
LCI(G)-407, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LSM(R)-193, Kamikaze hits 1, heavy damage
LCI(G)-438, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LSM(R)-191, Kamikaze hits 3, and is sunk

Aircraft Attacking:
46 x Ki-43-IV Oscar flying as kamikaze
Kamikaze: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring APA Sarasota
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring APA Latimer
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring APA Marvin McIntyre


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Gunzan at 102,52

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid spotted at 10 NM, estimated altitude 17,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 2 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A7M2 Sam x 29
B7A2 Grace x 40
N1K5-J George x 48

Japanese aircraft losses
B7A2 Grace: 27 destroyed
B7A2 Grace: 1 destroyed by flak

Allied Ships
LCI(G)-534, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LSM-370, Kamikaze hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
LSM-315
LCI(M)-670
LSM-417, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LCI(G)-460, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LSM-318, Kamikaze hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
LSM-362, Kamikaze hits 2, and is sunk
LCI-641
LCI-784, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LCI(M)-673, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LCI(G)-470
LCI-640, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LCI-783
LSM-364
LSM-415
LSM-355, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LSM-319, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LSM-420
LCI(M)-674, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LSM-358, Kamikaze hits 1, heavy damage
LSM-374
LSM-354
LCI(M)-633
LSM-419, Kamikaze hits 1, heavy damage
LSM-356, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LCI-654
LCI(G)-539, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LCI-639, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LSM-366, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LCI-786, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LCI(G)-459, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LSM-416
LCI(M)-669, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk
LCI(R)-647
LSM-414
LCI(G)-538
LCI-656

Allied ground losses:
1143 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 55 destroyed, 41 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 12 (12 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Vehicles lost 38 (32 destroyed, 6 disabled)

Aircraft Attacking:
40 x B7A2 Grace flying as kamikaze
Kamikaze: 2 x 250 kg SAP Bomb


(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 14
RE: Kamikazes - 4/7/2018 8:11:47 PM   
Barb


Posts: 2424
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline
Very nice Mr.Kane, but where is the allied CAP?

_____________________________

[img]https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BzOZPXg_qJ22TG43UmJ5UjRsb3c[/img]

(in reply to MrKane)
Post #: 15
RE: Kamikazes - 4/10/2018 4:06:32 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 16836
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Very nice.

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 16
RE: Kamikazes - 4/11/2018 1:53:01 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8647
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
What I noticed was that it took at least 3 Oscar hits to put an APA down ... that's a lot of hits. Translated to an armored warship, that means a lot of hits ....

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 17
RE: Kamikazes - 4/11/2018 4:46:06 AM   
MrKane


Posts: 743
Joined: 3/9/2013
From: West Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Barb

Very nice Mr.Kane, but where is the allied CAP?


Very good question, however I do not have this information ;)

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 18
RE: Kamikazes - 4/11/2018 4:51:16 AM   
MrKane


Posts: 743
Joined: 3/9/2013
From: West Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

What I noticed was that it took at least 3 Oscar hits to put an APA down ... that's a lot of hits. Translated to an armored warship, that means a lot of hits ....


Yes, true, however Oscar or Frank is the only plane shown ability get to ships in case when allied CAP is present.
In this case It did not matter, because a few minutes later this landing was hit by full KB strike. So there was no survivors anyway.

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 19
RE: Kamikazes - 4/11/2018 1:28:24 PM   
jwolf

 

Posts: 2312
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: online
quote:

... a few minutes later this landing was hit by full KB strike.


This is what really bothers me, in game, about the kamikazes. Historically the Japanese turned to kamikazes because conventional attacks were no longer possible with any chance of success. But in game, they get both; and in the hands of a master such as MrKane the result is devastating.

(in reply to MrKane)
Post #: 20
RE: Kamikazes - 4/11/2018 11:23:43 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8647
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwolf

quote:

... a few minutes later this landing was hit by full KB strike.


This is what really bothers me, in game, about the kamikazes. Historically the Japanese turned to kamikazes because conventional attacks were no longer possible with any chance of success. But in game, they get both; and in the hands of a master such as MrKane the result is devastating.

Maybe true, but kami attacks are expensive ... aircraft, pilots, and VP's are spent at a very high rate; and the expense is incurred whether they hit anything or not.



_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to jwolf)
Post #: 21
RE: Kamikazes - 4/12/2018 11:37:06 AM   
tarkalak

 

Posts: 253
Joined: 6/26/2017
From: Bulgaria
Status: offline
The Japanese didn't stop using regular bombers. If I remember correctly, the main reason for kamikaze tactics was that they didn't have enough trained pilots.

_____________________________

I do not know what is scarier: that I do understand nothing of this demonic script or that I am starting to see the demons that it evokes.

Me, studying for a PHD entry exam in Applied Mathematics.

(in reply to jwolf)
Post #: 22
RE: Kamikazes - 4/12/2018 2:11:32 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4159
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Barb

Very nice Mr.Kane, but where is the allied CAP?


The Allied CAP was not supposed to be required as that TF was supposed to sail away before the day turn. Of course it was not set to stop unloading but was waiting to be smashed. About 9 other convoy's obeyed orders.

MrKane is a tough opponent ;]

_____________________________


(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 23
RE: Kamikazes - 4/24/2018 11:58:46 PM   
el lobo


Posts: 825
Joined: 7/20/2013
From: Khon Kaen, Thailand (orig: Sacramento, CA)
Status: offline
What is the effect of the CAP setting, if any, for the kamikaze unit?

TIA


_____________________________

El Lobo (J) vs Rio Bravo (A)
Rio Bravo's AAR - "The War College"
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3851786

Gamey is not a game style. It is someone's definition.

(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 24
RE: Kamikazes - 4/25/2018 6:16:03 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 16836
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: el lobo

What is the effect of the CAP setting, if any, for the kamikaze unit?

TIA



It is a normal CAP setting...I tired using kamikaze fighters as CAP, hoping they would ram Thunderbolts or Bombers, but they performed just like fighters on cap.

I don't think the setting is present for bombers converted to kamikazes.

So my guess it is simply a hole in the code that wasn't cleaned up due to time/priority constraints.

(in reply to el lobo)
Post #: 25
RE: Kamikazes - 5/2/2018 12:30:37 PM   
el lobo


Posts: 825
Joined: 7/20/2013
From: Khon Kaen, Thailand (orig: Sacramento, CA)
Status: offline
IOW, to get them to fly as kamis, zero cap. Yes?

_____________________________

El Lobo (J) vs Rio Bravo (A)
Rio Bravo's AAR - "The War College"
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3851786

Gamey is not a game style. It is someone's definition.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 26
RE: Kamikazes - 5/2/2018 12:34:10 PM   
el lobo


Posts: 825
Joined: 7/20/2013
From: Khon Kaen, Thailand (orig: Sacramento, CA)
Status: offline
I am hesitant as a newbe to jump-in here but I have the general feeling, not necessarily from this thread, that use of kamikazes is somewhat maligned and there is some misconceptions regarding them.

I have to admit that my Nick kami unit below started out as an experiment, but unless this is just beginner's luck (I'm at Jan 10, '44.), it has totally changed my attitude towards kamis.

Comparing the two strikes on Takao, the kami strike was more effective and way less expensive than the conventional strike..

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Takao at 84,65

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 182 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet. (Nate at 2000' Franks at 20k.)
Estimated time to target is 57 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-27b Nate x 12
Ki-84a Frank x 23

Allied aircraft
P-47D2 Thunderbolt x 89

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-27b Nate: 5 destroyed
Ki-27b Nate: 2 destroyed by flak
Ki-84a Frank: 12 destroyed

No Allied losses

Allied Ships
AP Gen. A.E.Anderson, Kamikaze hits 1
xAP Cape Newenham, Kamikaze hits 1, on fire
xAP Neptuna, Kamikaze hits 1, heavy damage
xAP Lurline
xAP Boschfontein, Kamikaze hits 1
xAP Merkur, Kamikaze hits 1

Allied ground losses:
Vehicles lost 7 (1 destroyed, 6 disabled)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Takao at 84,65

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 75 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 24 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B6N2 Jill x 21
D4Y3 Judy x 27
N1K1-J George x 5
N1K2-J George x 7
Ki-84r Frank x 12

Allied aircraft
P-47D2 Thunderbolt x 86

Japanese aircraft losses
B6N2 Jill: 9 destroyed, 2 damaged
D4Y3 Judy: 19 destroyed
N1K1-J George: 2 destroyed
N1K2-J George: 3 destroyed
Ki-84r Frank: 6 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-47D2 Thunderbolt: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
xAP Lurline
xAP St. Mihel, Bomb hits 1, on fire
APA La Salle, Bomb hits 1
xAP Hong Siang, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
APA Custer, Bomb hits 1

Allied ground losses:
Vehicles lost 6 (2 destroyed, 4 disabled)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I had numerous conventional air strikes attempted at Allied DDs. Here is the one that succeeded.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Miyako-jima at 91,66

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 28 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 9 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ia Oscar x 8
Ki-84a Frank x 26

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-43-Ia Oscar: 3 destroyed

Allied Ships
DD Caldwell, Kamikaze hits 4, and is sunk


_____________________________

El Lobo (J) vs Rio Bravo (A)
Rio Bravo's AAR - "The War College"
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3851786

Gamey is not a game style. It is someone's definition.

(in reply to el lobo)
Post #: 27
RE: Kamikazes - 5/2/2018 12:38:32 PM   
el lobo


Posts: 825
Joined: 7/20/2013
From: Khon Kaen, Thailand (orig: Sacramento, CA)
Status: offline
This is a quote from Lowpe in the other Kamikaze thread by Big D.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Zero fighters are poor choices for kamikazes, although I saw one knock out a big gun turret on a battleship once.

But if you have plenty of them...

I am not sure how bomb payload and kamikaze strike damage relate. I am not sure on a lot of things with respect to kamikazes, and I have used a lot of them.

Fast is better. Armor is better. Single engine is less expensive. On a naval strike they all die. CVE and cargo ships are the best targets. 2-3 Nicks can sink a Fletcher if they can hit it. The larger the sentai, the more likely some kamikazes will get thru.

Lowpe.

For the sake of more conversation re: kamis, I would like to talk more about some of this.

I have a bias toward obsolete air frames and untrained pilots.

I don't know how well Zero will perform as a kami but perhaps it depends on your expectations. If they take anything out, as far as I am concerned, it is a bonus.

However, it is barley a choice. As you well know, kami units can up-grade, and down-grade, just like a conventional air unit. So you are not choosing just Zeros, but the whole Naval Fighter inventory from Clauds to Georges. (Never Sams, never. )

Secondly, depending on how you define plenty, I don't think you need plenty. Enough to fill the unit a couple or more times then moving on is justification enough. Besides, what are you going to do with all of your obsolete a/c, let them sit in the bone-yard the rest of the war?

Single engine is less expensive only if you built 2E for the use of kamikazes or plan on rebuilding the 2E plane. If you just plan on crashing obsolete planes, the pilot cost is the same.

In addition, when you have finished with all of the planes you plan to crash, your kami unit does not become useless as they can become training units freeing-up your conventional units. I accidentally converted a Nate unit that is Permanently Restricted to the HI. Since I can not use it as a kami unit at the moment, it is a training unit. This is anecdotal for me now, but watching this unit, it seems that it is training pilots in three skills at the same time. Besides the usual Air and Defense (for fighters,) it is building Low Nav (even at 10k'), which makes sense for a kami unit. Perhaps an nice bonus.

I would like to see more discussion on tactics and strategy.


_____________________________

El Lobo (J) vs Rio Bravo (A)
Rio Bravo's AAR - "The War College"
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3851786

Gamey is not a game style. It is someone's definition.

(in reply to el lobo)
Post #: 28
RE: Kamikazes - 5/2/2018 11:06:11 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 16836
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: el lobo

This is a quote from Lowpe in the other Kamikaze thread by Big D.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Zero fighters are poor choices for kamikazes, although I saw one knock out a big gun turret on a battleship once.

But if you have plenty of them...

I am not sure how bomb payload and kamikaze strike damage relate. I am not sure on a lot of things with respect to kamikazes, and I have used a lot of them.

Fast is better. Armor is better. Single engine is less expensive. On a naval strike they all die. CVE and cargo ships are the best targets. 2-3 Nicks can sink a Fletcher if they can hit it. The larger the sentai, the more likely some kamikazes will get thru.

Lowpe.

For the sake of more conversation re: kamis, I would like to talk more about some of this.

I have a bias toward obsolete air frames and untrained pilots.

I don't know how well Zero will perform as a kami but perhaps it depends on your expectations. If they take anything out, as far as I am concerned, it is a bonus.

However, it is barley a choice. As you well know, kami units can up-grade, and down-grade, just like a conventional air unit. So you are not choosing just Zeros, but the whole Naval Fighter inventory from Clauds to Georges. (Never Sams, never. )

Secondly, depending on how you define plenty, I don't think you need plenty. Enough to fill the unit a couple or more times then moving on is justification enough. Besides, what are you going to do with all of your obsolete a/c, let them sit in the bone-yard the rest of the war?

Single engine is less expensive only if you built 2E for the use of kamikazes or plan on rebuilding the 2E plane. If you just plan on crashing obsolete planes, the pilot cost is the same.

In addition, when you have finished with all of the planes you plan to crash, your kami unit does not become useless as they can become training units freeing-up your conventional units. I accidentally converted a Nate unit that is Permanently Restricted to the HI. Since I can not use it as a kami unit at the moment, it is a training unit. This is anecdotal for me now, but watching this unit, it seems that it is training pilots in three skills at the same time. Besides the usual Air and Defense (for fighters,) it is building Low Nav (even at 10k'), which makes sense for a kami unit. Perhaps an nice bonus.

I would like to see more discussion on tactics and strategy.



You can run out of fighters end game... I have. I used A6M2 as deep base air defense into late 1944 as they will still damage and shoot down 4E. They will shred SBD and Avengers too. I also used them as cap traps over islands etc late game. Not ideal, but when there is nothing else left...they still can earn the VP back. As kamikazes they tend to be VP gifts to the Allies.

Also, I seem to always need fighters to be fighters.

(in reply to el lobo)
Post #: 29
RE: Kamikazes - 5/3/2018 3:32:54 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8647
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Also, I seem to always need fighters to be fighters.


This is my biggest concern ... I can rarely convert fighters to kami simply because I never, ever have enough fighter groups ....

_____________________________

Pax

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

0.246