75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
User avatar
Tanaka
Posts: 5084
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 3:42 am
Location: USA

75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

Post by Tanaka »

There is just nothing I can do. I have only one Nick squadron of 12 planes total. What is strange is that almost all my Zeros were damaged by his bombers but that does not show up on this report but does in the combat animation...
Clipboard02.jpg
Clipboard02.jpg (603.16 KiB) Viewed 1594 times
Image
User avatar
Nomad
Posts: 7273
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: West Yellowstone, Montana

Re: 75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

Post by Nomad »

The Combat Report is heavily influenced by FoW. You would not want your opponent to know how many were damaged would you?

As far as your other concern, A6s are not going to shoot down many B-17s. But they can damage them and again that does not
show up in the Combat Report for FoW concerns. The B-17s also have a SR of 4 so the damaged ones will take a good long time
to repair.

If you would show the entire Combat Report entry we might make more comments.
User avatar
Moltrey
Posts: 415
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: 75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

Post by Moltrey »

As Nomad says, it is hard to tell with any certainty w/o the full combat report.
My guess is that the game determined that many of your fighters were caught on the ground and/or unprepared. 18 B-17Es can drop a lot of bombs on an airfield in short order.
That's the breaks in WITP:AE, sometimes you get the Bear... sometimes the Bear gets you.
"Chew, if only you could see what I've seen with your eyes." - Roy Batty
User avatar
Tanaka
Posts: 5084
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 3:42 am
Location: USA

Re: 75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

Post by Tanaka »

Nomad wrote: Thu Mar 03, 2022 4:58 pm The Combat Report is heavily influenced by FoW. You would not want your opponent to know how many were damaged would you?

As far as your other concern, A6s are not going to shoot down many B-17s. But they can damage them and again that does not
show up in the Combat Report for FoW concerns. The B-17s also have a SR of 4 so the damaged ones will take a good long time
to repair.

If you would show the entire Combat Report entry we might make more comments.
Sure thing will just copy and paste:

Morning Air attack on Rahaeng , at 58,56

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid spotted at 39 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 11 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 75

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 18

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged
A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed on ground
Ki-46-II Dinah: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress: 4 damaged

Airbase hits 3
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 8

Aircraft Attacking:
5 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
4 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
5 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
4 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
3rd Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (9 airborne, 28 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) intercepting now.
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 9000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 11 minutes
6th Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (12 airborne, 22 on standby, 0 scrambling)
12 plane(s) intercepting now.
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 9000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 18 minutes
Image
User avatar
Nomad
Posts: 7273
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: West Yellowstone, Montana

Re: 75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

Post by Nomad »

I would say everything looks about right from your side.
I have no idea how the Allied player fared. Did he fly again the next day?
If so, how many B-17 aircraft flew. That would indicate how many damaged
aircraft he sustained.

There are no guarantees or absolutes. And sometimes you have to make inferences based on
the replay details, the combat report, and what happens in the following turns.

One other thing, were there any ops losses reported? Sometimes aircraft are written off and they
do not show up in the combat replay.
User avatar
Tanaka
Posts: 5084
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 3:42 am
Location: USA

Re: 75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

Post by Tanaka »

Nomad wrote: Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:59 pm I would say everything looks about right from your side.
I have no idea how the Allied player fared. Did he fly again the next day?
If so, how many B-17 aircraft flew. That would indicate how many damaged
aircraft he sustained.

There are no guarantees or absolutes. And sometimes you have to make inferences based on
the replay details, the combat report, and what happens in the following turns.

One other thing, were there any ops losses reported? Sometimes aircraft are written off and they
do not show up in the combat replay.
Thanks for your input. Have not run the next turn yet. He will raid and rest and so on. Very true I will check on the other things you mention. Will try and get my 12 Nicks up there haha
Image
LowesyPC
Posts: 129
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2022 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: 75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

Post by LowesyPC »

Hey there, what map are you using?
User avatar
Tanaka
Posts: 5084
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 3:42 am
Location: USA

Re: 75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

Post by Tanaka »

LowesyPC wrote: Fri Mar 04, 2022 6:18 pm Hey there, what map are you using?
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 8&t=309940
Image
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: 75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

Post by Lowpe »

You had 11 minute warning, which is low....add more radar, and AA.

You actually only fought with 21 planes...almost equal numbers.

Vary your intercepting altitudes. If you are only fighting beasts I have found that being 2k below the bombing run works well, and 2K above the approach and at the bombing altitude. So that gives you a band to patrol at...
User avatar
Tanaka
Posts: 5084
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 3:42 am
Location: USA

Re: 75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

Post by Tanaka »

Lowpe wrote: Sat Mar 05, 2022 1:51 pm You had 11 minute warning, which is low....add more radar, and AA.

You actually only fought with 21 planes...almost equal numbers.

Vary your intercepting altitudes. If you are only fighting beasts I have found that being 2k below the bombing run works well, and 2K above the approach and at the bombing altitude. So that gives you a band to patrol at...
Very true he hit me where I had no AA. So what is the 75 vs 21 difference? I had almost 80 planes on 100% CAP. I guess that is the warning problem. Suggestions for best units with radar?

Thanks for the altitude tips will try that!
Image
spence
Posts: 5421
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 6:56 am
Location: Vancouver, Washington

Re: 75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

Post by spence »

IRL Japanese fighters don't carry enough cannon ammunition to seriously disrupt the bombing run of even a few B-17s. At Midway, in "Shattered Sword" VT-6 attacked the KB and owed its (marginal) survival to the fact that most of the CAP was initially shooting at them with just their 7.7 mm machine guns because they'd used up their cannon ammo wiping out Torpedo 8. Even Devastators had enough armor so that half of them or so managed to drop their torpedoes and 4 of them even survived their attack. B-17s are armored much better than TBDs and have the additional advantage of multiple engines. It should also be noted also that the Japanese CAP didn't even mess with the B-17s that attacked KB due to their very respectable defensive firepower (the B-17s attacked at 20000 feet and didn't hit anything).
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: 75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

Post by Lowpe »

Tanaka wrote: Thu Mar 03, 2022 7:49 pm

CAP engaged:
3rd Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (9 airborne, 28 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) intercepting now.
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 9000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 11 minutes
6th Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (12 airborne, 22 on standby, 0 scrambling)
12 plane(s) intercepting now.
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 9000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 18 minutes
9 + 12 = 21

Some of the first group might have made it...was their a combat animation after the bombing run?

Set one squadron at 7K. The lower patrol altitude means less time to intercept. On another note, I have always had success using Claudes to intercept beasts...something about their wild agility lets them really dance with the beasts and not suffer. They don't do much but ping the beasts, but usually that is enough.

On land, I never use 100% CAP, almost always use 10% (sometimes more) rest, and generally in the 30 to 50 percent CAP setting.

Can't tell from what you post, but morale, leadership, fatigue greatly effect your performance.

100% CAP runs your frames and pilots into the ground.
ishtarin
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2021 12:44 am

Re: 75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

Post by ishtarin »

If you have PDU on, I believe any bomber group can switch to Ki-45s so long as you change them to single engine bombers first.
User avatar
Tanaka
Posts: 5084
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 3:42 am
Location: USA

Re: 75 Zeros vs 18 B17E's. I lose!

Post by Tanaka »

Lowpe wrote: Sun Mar 06, 2022 1:03 pm
Tanaka wrote: Thu Mar 03, 2022 7:49 pm

CAP engaged:
3rd Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (9 airborne, 28 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) intercepting now.
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 9000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 11 minutes
6th Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (12 airborne, 22 on standby, 0 scrambling)
12 plane(s) intercepting now.
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 9000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 18 minutes
9 + 12 = 21

Some of the first group might have made it...was their a combat animation after the bombing run?

Set one squadron at 7K. The lower patrol altitude means less time to intercept. On another note, I have always had success using Claudes to intercept beasts...something about their wild agility lets them really dance with the beasts and not suffer. They don't do much but ping the beasts, but usually that is enough.

On land, I never use 100% CAP, almost always use 10% (sometimes more) rest, and generally in the 30 to 50 percent CAP setting.

Can't tell from what you post, but morale, leadership, fatigue greatly effect your performance.

100% CAP runs your frames and pilots into the ground.
Woah you found a use for Claudes haha. Gotcha on the altitude that makes sense.

Yeah I don't keep on 100% CAP just useful at certain times...
Image
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”