I noticed the same thing played against the AI (if you can call it that). The 1941 Blizzard = bye bye Wehrmacht. Pretty much every SU attack = a shatter.

<t>Hi Folks,<br/>
<br/>
I've been playing this game on and off since the DOS days, but I've yet to figure out the difference between CAP and Escort missions. So far as I've been able to determine, setting my fighters to CAP missions just means that less of them will be available for airbase defense ...

<t>I'd agree. Against the AI, I've found that you can hold Port Moresby and usually buna pretty easily. Gili-Gili is a trap though; you can't supply it, so just leave it be. Whoever owns gili-gili has to try to supply it and can't. Better to let the Japanese lose APs there than you do.<br/>
<br/>
I ...

<t>Counterintuitive though it may seem in an air war, the best way to deal with massive strikes out of raboul is ...<br/>
<br/>
Launch your own massive strikes *on* raboul.<br/>
<br/>
Its in medium bomber ranger from Lae, Buna, or the beach beside buna.<br/>
<br/>
Bring your mediums in at 1000 ...

<t>While it is rather ahistorical. if you want to see some true beat-down, try bringing in your B-17s at 1000 feet. They'll take slightly more casualties, but they'll put the base out of comission faster and hence not have to deal with CAP later on.<br/>
<br/>
Everything on the deck appears to be ...

<t>I'm not too concerned with whether there are the proper number of transports in theatre or not. The concern is that you cannot supply the proper number of bases.<br/>
<br/>
Either this means:<br/>
<br/>
A) Bases are using more supply than is historically appropriate.<br/>
B) The game is giving ...

Perhaps for the forthcoming pacific war game? The Russians and Japanese did fight a bit at the end of the war when the Russians broke the Japanese garrison in Manchuria.

<t>I've been operating under the assumption that each supply point is 5 metric tons.<br/>
<br/>
This gives the allied small APs a load of 5,000 metric tons, and the large ones about 15,000 metric tons.<br/>
<br/>
This seems more or less in line with the historical numbers e.g. a liberty ship had a ...

I agree, the best use I've found for the long island is as bait in a transport group. It draws fire away from the APs and can even put up a smidge of CAP. The fact that is usually sinks is really not an issue in my mind.

<t>Hi Folks,<br/>
<br/>
I started the original transport poverty thread a couple of weeks ago, and I was sort of surprised that so many people were having similar issues. I spent some time thinking about the issue and I'm sort of toying with a different explanation.<br/>
<br/>
The basic problem ...

<t>Did anyone check the supplies delivered/day against the dakota's load? Its possible that the range figure the designers chose represents the maximum distance at which the dakota can make 2 or 3 round trips per day. <br/>
<br/>
e.g. The dakota can make one 1600 mile round trip per day, delivering ...

Thanks Sarge, I never noticed such a message but I'll take your word it was there.

<t>You can lay a trap for the bombardment missions if you're willing to take some surface losses.<br/>
<br/>
Park a surface combat fleet in Port Moseby with do not retire. It doesn't have to be a massive force, just a half dozen destroyers will generally do the trick.<br/>
<br/>
This will cause ...

<t>I have to disagree to an extent. In my experience, if you're the japanese and the Allied player wants to hit you with massed low level medium/heavy bomber strikes, then you may as well write off the base.<br/>
<br/>
Not CAP, not AA, not counterstrikes with nell/betties against his bases, will do ...

<t>I don't think the problem lies in the kill ratios. It was *very* rare for a strike to get totally obliterated, no matter what the odds were. <br/>
<br/>
The issue, in my opinion, is that the game doesn't take into account a pilot/squadron leaders very rational and historically proven ability to ...

<t>Yah. I don't even know that we need to, as players, be able to set the priority<br/>
<br/>
I'd just like the game to keep seperate *target* levels for different ship classes.<br/>
<br/>
e.g. the January 1st, 1943 target levels could be (Allied)<br/>
<br/>
CV X 4<br/>
BB X 4<br/>
CA X 8<br ...

<t>I find the AI is reasonably good at tactical ship handling.<br/>
<br/>
Its *terrible* at stategy though. If you (as the player) do something unusual enough, you can really give it fits.<br/>
<br/>
As an example, try to make an early invasion of Raboul. The AI rarely garrison's it sufficiently ...

<t>As it stands, you can tell your aircraft to initiate attacks on ground targets at a specific hex e.g. I want you to bomb lunga.<br/>
<br/>
The AI decides on its own though, which targets to bomb in Lunga.<br/>
<br/>
The AI has a habit of picking the same target over, and over, and over again ...

<t>Yeah, I tried that too, but ultimately a transport moving at half speed is only half as valuable as one moving at full speed b/c delivers 1/2 the supplies per unit time.<br/>
<br/>
The problem, I think, is mre subtle than just jimmying with the replacement schedule. <br/>
<br/>
The replacement ...

<t>Sure, things do break. but there's a world of difference between the wardroom coffee pot breaking and the ship slowing from 33 to 27 knots cruising speed.<br/>
<br/>
Most of the things that break on a ship get fixed right then and there. Warships carry lots of spare parts and repair technicians ...