Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!!

 
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 >> More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 2:47:56 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline
Hi all, I was struggling badly with the economy a while back but got some excellent advice off Damian on the steps needed to get it back on track. However, I have encountered several new problems that I would like some general advice on.


OK, ignore the the above, it is a smoke screen for my real question.

Currently in my PBEM it is July 43. I'm certain my opponent Dan is going to push North from Darwin into the DEI and/or Celebes. He has been building up several Islands to the east of Timor. Recon of Darwin shows loads of transports in the Harbour and 100! ground units at the location.

I currently have carrier superiortity in numbers, but I know he is going to receive 3 or 4 Essex CVs this month, so that will soon vanish.

What I was thinking of doing was a massive port strike on Darwin with every available CV, CVL and CVE I have, with the objective of sinking a large number of transports there, thus delaying his invasions and giving me extra time to build up my defences in the area.

I would have 1000 a/c on my flight decks, 450 fighters and 550 strike a/c. Recon shows he has about 200 fighters at Darwin, so I am confident all of the strike a/c would get through with a 300 Zero escort. However, the one sticking point is the number of ground units he has in the hex. Do they all contribute to the flak defence? If so any attack would be suicide...........

Looking for advice and opinions on this idea..........



Post #: 1
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 3:34:57 PM   
Athius

 

Posts: 73
Joined: 9/12/2009
Status: offline
Gehe, I like your plan and I like your smokescreen, its evil.

I think the ground units contribute to the flak, as regular AA units are essentialy ground units with a lot of AAA in their TOE.




As for the economy: I suggest moving all the oil back to Tokyo.

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 2
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 3:48:45 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 25326
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
Hi Miller,

I'm a regular reader and contributor to Canoerebel's AAR, so my answer to your question will be a bit perfunctory and picayune in order to avoid any preknowledge of your opponent's situation creeping into my advice.

It is my understanding that units that are on "Combat" setting (versus 'rest' or 'move') with AAA capabilities will contribute said AAA abilities to overall air defense of the hex in which they reside.

Good luck!

_____________________________


(in reply to Athius)
Post #: 3
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 3:56:13 PM   
CapAndGown


Posts: 3205
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline
My experience as an IJN player is that Flak is murderous. Do not do it with Vals as they dive down to 2000-3000 feet and get shot at twice. If you go for it, use Kates that are set to using bombs and fly them up high, like 15000 feet.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 4
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 4:02:34 PM   
Athius

 

Posts: 73
Joined: 9/12/2009
Status: offline
Or replace the pilots and do it with Vals anyway, you can rebuild the planes and the sheer mass of planes will insure some hits.

(in reply to CapAndGown)
Post #: 5
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 4:15:42 PM   
String


Posts: 2661
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Estonia
Status: offline
Most, if not all of allied light AA has a ceiling below 10k feet, so as long as you keep your bombers above 10k you'll be fine. Do you have any LB bases nearby? If so you can also support the strike with Betties/Nells from high alt.

_____________________________

Surface combat TF fanboy

(in reply to Athius)
Post #: 6
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 4:20:57 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: String

Most, if not all of allied light AA has a ceiling below 10k feet, so as long as you keep your bombers above 10k you'll be fine. Do you have any LB bases nearby? If so you can also support the strike with Betties/Nells from high alt.


Thanks excellent news!

Re the DBs taking heavy flak, I'm not too concerned about their losses, most of the pilots are rookies anyway, whereas my TB pilots are all veterans.

I could throw in about 150 Bettys as well, but I have visions of them going in before the main strike and being chewed up by the CAP........

(in reply to String)
Post #: 7
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 4:24:21 PM   
khyberbill


Posts: 1941
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline
I have no idea what is on the ground there but most probably only have light AA which would be most effective if you were doing a ground strike, however, you are attacking the port so ship AA and regular AA would probably be the most effective. Expect a lot of damage if not loss. You are going to lose the planes sometime, why not when you choose?

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 8
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 5:34:06 PM   
ChickenOfTheSea


Posts: 579
Joined: 6/7/2008
From: Virginia
Status: offline
Miller,
It is my understanding that Val's set to above 15000 ft will level bomb rather than dive bomb. They won't be as effective, but you won't get murdered by flak either. I haven;t actually tried this tactic, but I have seen it discussed on the board under altitude effects on dive bombers.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to khyberbill)
Post #: 9
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 5:41:17 PM   
topeverest


Posts: 3376
Joined: 10/17/2007
From: Houston, TX - USA
Status: offline
Why not use massed long range land based bomber assets as a warm up and the carriers as a follow on the next turn if successful.

If you move in your carrier assets first against a large land base(s) obviously armed to the teeth, that seems pretty risky. If you have all those CV assets in your possession, that also is a hell of a force to rapidly counter his fleet once it goes into action. The port attack is risky unless you have really good intel that major combat ships are there. bagging a bunch of AP's will be a total waste.

let me know what you decide. I am most curious what will happen.

_____________________________

Andy M

(in reply to ChickenOfTheSea)
Post #: 10
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 6:55:54 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: topeverest

Why not use massed long range land based bomber assets as a warm up and the carriers as a follow on the next turn if successful.

If you move in your carrier assets first against a large land base(s) obviously armed to the teeth, that seems pretty risky. If you have all those CV assets in your possession, that also is a hell of a force to rapidly counter his fleet once it goes into action. The port attack is risky unless you have really good intel that major combat ships are there. bagging a bunch of AP's will be a total waste.

let me know what you decide. I am most curious what will happen.



My CV strength is at its peak now, his is growing. I doubt he will invade any major base in the area until he recieves his new Essex's to help cover, and whilst he is waiting the numerous small Islands he is building up north of Darwin will grow and all be capable of holding hundreds of LBA between them.

I know the Allies get a million transports, however I am hoping to hit the specialist APAs and I think there will be lots of CA/CLs in port as well, as he is using them on fast transport missions to get troops and supply to the bases he is building to the north.

I am going to go with the operation, I will set my DBs to 15000ft and the TBs to 12000ft, accuracy will suffer but hopefully it will negate most of the flak potential, and 300 high exp Zeros as escort should keep his CAP away. With us playing two day turns as well hopefully the second day strike will finish off a lot of cripples with him not having any chance to beef up the CAP after day one.

I will post again on this thread just before I send him the turn, probably late this week.

(in reply to topeverest)
Post #: 11
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 7:26:22 PM   
topeverest


Posts: 3376
Joined: 10/17/2007
From: Houston, TX - USA
Status: offline
I never play 2 day turns so I really dont know how that dynamic plays. Good luck. I think your plan has the elements of a winning strike plan - massive use of coordinated assets against a large and presumably unready enemy, sudden onset, and quick retreat / reforcing for future opportunities. Let me suggest over stocking some pilots and planes in the attack units prior to execution. Also, if you launch close to a friendly base, you can use that CAP to help your convoys.


_____________________________

Andy M

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 12
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 7:51:38 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7261
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline
I read Dan's AAR, so can't really comment, other than to please post your side of the report after it's done. Should be interesting.

_____________________________


(in reply to topeverest)
Post #: 13
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 9:28:43 PM   
Barb


Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline
You should either go under 10k or over 20k. Kates will glide bomb from those altitudes and Vals will dive bomb from 10-14k and glide bomb from 15-19k. As the allied 37 and 40mm AA guns have ceiling up to 9800, you should certainly go over 20k.

But with the large fleet there and chance to deal serious blow to his lift capacity I would go for maximum damage adding up whatever plane I could get my hands on.

About land AA units: Only AA-designated weapons fire higher than 2000 ft.


_____________________________


(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 14
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/7/2010 9:36:15 PM   
USSAmerica


Posts: 18668
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Status: offline
Miller, I am in favor of trying to do some damage. What good are all your powerful CV's if you keep them safe until they are no longer even a speed bump for your opponent's growing CV strength? I am eager to see your results. Good luck!

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me


Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 15
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/8/2010 12:55:39 AM   
Nomad


Posts: 5510
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: West Yellowstone, Montana
Status: online
This is from the notes with Patch 2:

62. Gameplay Change: Placed limits on glide bombing altitudes. A TD/DB/FB/F group must be at 10-20K altitude to perform glide bombing, otherwise it is a normal level bombing attack. Groups were at maximum altitude and conducting glide bombs attack, sometimes without engaging CAP or flak.

note that TD was supposed to be TB. So, you must set your DB to either 9,000 feet or 21,000 feet to keep them from doing a dive bomb( or glide bomb ) style attack.

_____________________________


(in reply to USSAmerica)
Post #: 16
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/8/2010 4:03:48 AM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

If your Vals are rookies, they aren't going to hit anything anyway. So set your Kates right and go for it.


_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Nomad)
Post #: 17
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/8/2010 7:05:47 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6381
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline
Similar comment to Chickenman & QBall,

What are you likely to run into in the way of AAA?

Brit 3.7", US 90mm & 75mm, maybe some 3" if replacements have been low.
40mm, 20mm & 50cal LAA

You say 100 Allied Units.

Go ahead, I'd love to see the results


_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 18
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/8/2010 10:17:04 AM   
String


Posts: 2661
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Estonia
Status: offline
What do you think you're options are with naval bombardment? How large is the port there anyway atm?

Edit: If your betties come in from far away then they should probably come last.

_____________________________

Surface combat TF fanboy

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 19
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/8/2010 1:26:57 PM   
xj900uk

 

Posts: 1340
Joined: 3/22/2007
Status: offline
I take it substitute 'glide bomb' for 'dive bomb'?  Therefore all DB's must be 10k-20k feet in order to dive bomb?

Re hitting Darwin, good idea but don't use up your decent carrier-trained pilots as they are priceless to the IJN and should be retained for hitting his carriers.  Better to hit with LBA's and for a decent twist go in and hit hard by night first then for an added measure do an unexpected bombardment force (send in DD's first to try and get mines with a BB/CA force hot on their heels)

(in reply to String)
Post #: 20
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/8/2010 2:00:16 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 25326
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

I take it substitute 'glide bomb' for 'dive bomb'?  Therefore all DB's must be 10k-20k feet in order to dive bomb?

Re hitting Darwin, good idea but don't use up your decent carrier-trained pilots as they are priceless to the IJN and should be retained for hitting his carriers.  Better to hit with LBA's and for a decent twist go in and hit hard by night first then for an added measure do an unexpected bombardment force (send in DD's first to try and get mines with a BB/CA force hot on their heels)

No. Glide bomb is a different process than dive bombing. Instead of neck snapping high G dives and pullouts at low altitudes, planes enter a shallow 'glide' which is coincidental with an attack vector on the target. There is no 'dive' per se and the attack begins and ends at a higher altitude.

_____________________________


(in reply to xj900uk)
Post #: 21
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/8/2010 6:43:18 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline
I must admit I'm confused as hell re altitude settings. Setting them above 20000ft is a waste of time as they will hit nothing. I'm going to set all the DB/TB to 12000ft, and the escort to 15000ft, that way hopefully I will get a fully co-ordinated attack.

I am loathe to use my Bettys as they always seem to lose their escort and go in alone, you can guess the rest. Bombardments are a waste of time in AE and besides, the BBs would have to wade through a load of PT boats and small transport TFs before even getting a shot at the base. Any ship that is damaged would be dead the next day.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 22
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/8/2010 8:44:02 PM   
DarkestHour

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 8/4/2009
Status: offline
Escort co-ordination problems have been reported when you set the fighters to a different altitude. Set the escorts to the bombers altitude for best results.

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 23
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/9/2010 1:44:16 PM   
xj900uk

 

Posts: 1340
Joined: 3/22/2007
Status: offline
quote:

No. Glide bomb is a different process than dive bombing. Instead of neck snapping high G dives and pullouts at low altitudes, planes enter a shallow 'glide' which is coincidental with an attack vector on the target. There is no 'dive' per se and the attack begins and ends at a higher altitude.

I honestly know what the difference is, but thanks anyway! I've actually flown (simulated) a few dive-bomb attacks in an old Val, but that's a story for another time!

quote:

I must admit I'm confused as hell re altitude settings. Setting them above 20000ft is a waste of time as they will hit nothing. I'm going to set all the DB/TB to 12000ft, and the escort to 15000ft, that way hopefully I will get a fully co-ordinated attack.

Me too, I want my dive-bombers to dive bomb rather than glide bomb! Dive Bombing particularly of enemy ships was usually far more effective, altough I conceed that AA losses could be higher and also glide-bomb is easier for rookie pilots

(in reply to DarkestHour)
Post #: 24
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/10/2010 4:13:12 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline
Well the turn is sent, just awaiting the reply.

300 TB and 220 DB are all going in at 15000ft. Of the 430 available Zeros, 100 will sweep and 230 will escort, leaving 100 for CAP (I doubt I will face any big counterattack but better safe than sorry). All of my TFs are under 200 a/c each so hopefully I wont have any major co-ordination issues.

Clear Sky over the area, I think he spotted my TFs but I have come too far to turn back now. Lets hope the dice rolls are favourable.....

(in reply to xj900uk)
Post #: 25
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/10/2010 4:23:23 PM   
nashvillen


Posts: 3835
Joined: 7/3/2006
From: Christiana, TN
Status: offline
This should be interesting... :D

New Japanese Fanboy

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 26
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/10/2010 4:43:48 PM   
Barb


Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline
I hope you didnt forget to maximise DL of his base with your recon 

_____________________________


(in reply to nashvillen)
Post #: 27
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/10/2010 5:56:46 PM   
undercovergeek

 

Posts: 1526
Joined: 11/21/2006
From: UK
Status: offline
looking at Canoerebels AAR i dont think it went that well

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 28
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/10/2010 6:17:18 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline
Hi all, yes, alas it was a disaster.

Instead of going in together the strikes were split up. Against a CAP of 160 fighters (what I expected) the bigger ones got through with even losses in fighters, however the flak was murder. The smaller strikes were eaten alive by CAP.

Total losses over the two days were 77 fighters, 129 TBs (74 a2a, 55 flak) and 150 DBs (29 a2a, 121 flak). So overall I lost 60% of the attacking a/c

So what did I hit? I'm guessing about 30 assorted AP/Ks, 30 smaller craft such as AMs and MLs, a few subs......nothing of note really. I guess half of that number will go down.

I can live with the DB losses, as the pilots were low exp, but those torp pilots going down really hurt. Just my luck that all the small unescorted raids consisted of the TBs, not the DBs.

So overall, a raid that promised much delivered little....never the less I fight on.

(in reply to undercovergeek)
Post #: 29
RE: More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! - 2/10/2010 6:27:04 PM   
USSAmerica


Posts: 18668
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Status: offline
Sorry it didn't pay off more, Miller.  Did your DB's execute actual dive bombing attacks from the 15k altitude you set them to?  I worried a bit about that when you posted it, because there's some wondering about the actual cutoff for dive/glide/level bombing with them.

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me


Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> More Jap economy woes (NO CANOEREBEL)!! 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