Port attack - house rule versus AI

[Yaab]

This disastrous air raid on Rabaul and its ships got me thinking
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 9#p5220919

In the PTO, the most successful raids against disbanded ships were performed by CV aircraft - a mix of torpedo bombers and dive bombers

-Pearl Harbor attack in 1941
-the USN Marshall-Gilberts raids in 1942
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshalls ... erts_raids
-IJN Darwin attack in 1942 (180 CV aircraft, 50 level-bombers)
-IJN Easter Sunday Raid (Ceylon 1942)
-USN Operation Hailstone (Truk 1944)
-USN attack on Kure (1945)

EDIT: The Kanalkampf part of the Battle of Britain included attacks on ports by level bombers. Briefly scanning the Wikipedia article, I found only one WITP:AE-like attack employing level-bombers, the 11 August 1940 air raid on Portland:

" The He 111s bombed from 15,000 ft (4,600 m) while the Ju 88s dropped to 10,000 ft (3,000 m) and hit the oil storage tanks. The destroyers Scimitar and Skate were damaged in Portland.[153][e] The trawler Peter Carey was severely damaged and SS Kirnwood (3,829 GRT) and tanker SS Oil Trader (5,550 GRT) were hit.[154]"

Other ship damaged/ships sunk instances mention Ju-87 Stuka dive-bomber as the attacking aircraft.

- - - - -

Now, in WITP:AE it is easy to massacre disbanded shipping in ports by 2E and 4E bombers flying in box formations. The AAR raid hit 100 ships, while the Wikipedia entry for Rabaul says 65 ships were sunk in Simpon's Harbor during the entire war (I guess most were sunk by B-25 or B-26 perfroming 100 feet attacks). The game code seems to treat disbaned ships as a sort of a continuous landmass like a peninsula, over which you can fly, drop bombs, and still register hits somewhere.

So I was thinking about limiting myself on port attacks against AI to:

-dive bombers
-torpedo bombers (or level bombers with torps but this seem fickle on port attacks)
-fighters/fighter-bombers/level bombers on 100 feet strafing/skip-bombing attack
-occasional patrol aircrfat attack (sort of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_K)

Level bombers over ports will be tasked with recon, airfield attack, and ground attack.

I just don't understand why US Army didn't just mass a 50 B-17s and sink everything in the Rabaul's bay in RL.

[RangerJoe]

They did bomb Rabaul at night with B-17s during 1942. Those aircraft aimed and drop one bomb at a time at only a few thousand feet altitude. I believe one plane hit more than one ship and sank at least one ship. This was ended because the US Army got more twin engined bombers in the area. So it is not unrealistic to have night bombing against the ports with 4Es.

As far as comparing the number of ships sunk at certain places during the war to the number of ships sunk at that same place during a game, then restrict the players to only sending ships to certain places at the same time as they were actually sent there. Then also have the other player attack that base with the same number of aircraft, ships, and so on. Of course, you could just play the game and not try to reenact the entire war.

[PaxMondo]

Of course, you could just play the game and not try to reenact the entire war.

[Chickenboy]

They did bomb Rabaul at night with B-17s during 1942. Those aircraft aimed and drop one bomb at a time at only a few thousand feet altitude. I believe one plane hit more than one ship and sank at least one ship. This was ended because the US Army got more twin engined bombers in the area. So it is not unrealistic to have night bombing against the ports with 4Es.

Very much 'meh' to that idea, particularly with your B17s hitting Rabaul analogy.

In 1942, B17s flying over the Owen Stanleys to attack Rabaul *were* a thing. However, their efficacy-in historical hindsight-was poor, while the cost of attacking like this was stiff. And they suffered by lack of fighter support, navigational difficulties, the presence of FLAK on and around Rabaul and sheer lack of numbers (B17s) available for such raids. There were never any of the myriad "1000 bomber raids" in the Pacific like there were in the Reich. It was just a different beast, and one that didn't suit singleton early war B17s trying to do high altitude bombing whilest dodging enemy fighters and FLAK.

So yes-"allow" nighttime bombing against the ports at night in 1942. But redo the algorithm to triple OPS losses, cut accuracy by 2/3rds and really make it of questionable value to the Allies. Just like IRL.

Or-try this-don't try to stretch the game engine to beyond what was reasonably represented in the war. Nighttime bombing, like a handful of other issues in the game, is one such 'feature' of WiTP:AE. Kind of like the toned-down effects of malaria in the game that don't really mirror the significant impact in strategy that was 'malarial avoidance' IRL.

One could go on and list other examples, but I think the point is clear. The possibility of this effort, with the minimal 'price tag' associated with nighttime bombing as depicted in the early game especially, skews the realism of the game in this aspect.

By all means, do what you want versus the AI. Goodness knows it 'cheats' early and often. But sinking his ships in port, especially at night by 4EB is more than could be managed IRL.

[RangerJoe]

I think that part of the problem with night bombing is the ineffectiveness of the night fighters. I was glancing through the book "Ghost Soldiers" and as the soldiers, guerillas, fillipinos with their oxcarts on the way back from the raid as well as the civilians were walking back to the US Army, one Black Widow patrolling the road destroyed 5 trucks loaded with soldiers and one tank.