CV battle - discussion

[mdiehl]

.S. i'm waiting for MDiehl to chime in about Tone FP being lucky and I got what I deserved at Midway

I was thinking that for the first time I've seen the Japanese get Midwayed at Midway. Sounds like you think the output is unreasonable -- that's no surprise to me. [>:]

Japan sends 4 CVs into operational radius of a functional US controlled land base with a good runway and recon and strike assets, out of range of substantial supporting Japanese LBA, and loses (? perhaps?) 4 carriers to carrier aviation from a USN TF. Your complaint is..... what exactly?

[RevRick]

If you wish, I'll take a look, Speedy. And I promise, since I am probably old enough to be your father, that I won't take advantage either way....

[Speedysteve]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

.S. i'm waiting for MDiehl to chime in about Tone FP being lucky and I got what I deserved at Midway

I was thinking that for the first time I've seen the Japanese get Midwayed at Midway. Sounds like you think the output is unreasonable -- that's no surprise to me. [>:]

Japan sends 4 CVs into operational radius of a functional US controlled land base with a good runway and recon and strike assets, out of range of substantial supporting Japanese LBA, and loses (? perhaps?) 4 carriers to carrier aviation from a USN TF. Your complaint is..... what exactly?

My complaint is that of 6 x CV I had not 1 plane attacked the enemy TF's that had been spotted for a week on end by Recon and by Glen subs. I was not detected until the day of battle.

[Speedysteve]

ORIGINAL: RevRick

If you wish, I'll take a look, Speedy. And I promise, since I am probably old enough to be your father, that I won't take advantage either way....

Thanks Rev. Nik has the files already though and should be looking[:)]

[mdiehl]

My complaint is that of 6 x CV I had not 1 plane attacked the enemy TF's that had been spotted for a week on end by Recon and by Glen subs. I was not detected until the day of battle.

Hmm. Well, not having played WitP enough to know, perhaps there is some (rather relistic) US signals intelligence factor here that indicated you were coming. I think that spotting is a day to day activity though, and it is not particularly unrealistic that even if you'd spotted those USN TFs the previous day, that you would be spotted first by USN recon and be subjected first to airstrikes on a very unfortunate day (for you, clearly, but not your dad).

As for counterstrike, I'd have expected one or two of your CVs to launch an attenuated stike mission, although I would not expect a priori that they'd sink anything important.

I *am* kind of surprised that it turned out that way for you given what I've seen of other WitP AARs. As a matter of consim I think this kind of thing should happen more often to the Japanese in WitP than it seems to, when the Japanese move an unsupported (by LBA or massive numbers of CVs) carrier strike force within recon or strike range of a well-developed allied airbase and when there are US/UK CVs in the area to exploit such a strategic imbalance.

I agree that by past WitP examples you would not have expected the outcome that occurred.

[Mike Solli]

You know Speedy, I did have something similar happen with KB twice.  I started 2 PBEMs and used the same start for both.  I didn't touch KB and had them attack PH just like they're set up to do in both.  Not one plane launched in both of the PBEMs.  I chalked it up to weather and both of my opponents were gracious enough to allow me to change the attack hex of KB.  That worked.

[Dino]

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Hi Castor,

No only 24 x Val failed to locate target.

Well, I checked page 132 of the manual as suggested by Gem35 and found this "gem":

In each airstrike, one air group is designated as the lead group for that strike. If the lead air group fails to find the Target, all air groups in the airstrike will fail to locate the Target. A message will be shown if a group fails to find a Target after takeoff.

[HansBolter]

I just had a similar experience at the very beginning o0f a solitaire game.

I sent the two American carriers over to Wake and set the Wake fighter to naval attack at strafing altitude.

The Wake fighter strafed the Jap ships with very little effect. The first carrier to arrive hit the Jap ships with one sorty that hurt them badly.

For the next two turns straight the Jap ships sat there without moving and without the Wake fighter or either of the two carriers launching a sinlge sorty against them.

All planes had the proper settings to be launching naval strikes.

The carriers were two hexes away from Wake, each carrier TF in a seperate hex.

Planes from three seperate hexes refused to fly against ships with absolutely no CAP over them.

[Speedysteve]

Wicked. Thanks Dino[;)]
 
You can see it now. Sorry sir every pilot is going back to have a **** on deck since we can't find that Island we've been reconning for a week on end (no problem that recon plane finding it mind you).
 
In all seriousness I am not mega p*ssed. I am surprised and VERY disappointed at how it worked out according to:
 
a.) As MDiehl says this normally turns out in WiTP.
 
b.) I had planned this well for 3 weeks and had fooled my father into thinking KB was elsewhere.
 
c.) The fact I have a mass of ace pilots against 4 x USN CV that were in a 'coastal' hex = 1/2 strike apparently.
 
I expect to lose between 3 and 4 CV's tops. The war has changed and my invasion of India is now scrapped.
 
The irony of this is that this aggressive action by me will now prevent my AV at the end of 1942 and may actually lead to a much better game since my Dad will have more of a chance despite his in-experience vs my experience.

[Dino]

It wouldn't surprise me if the game gave some "snake eyes" to the Japanese engaging in a carrier battle around Midway in early 42...just for historic flavour. [;)] [:D]

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Dino

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Hi Castor,

No only 24 x Val failed to locate target.

Well, I checked page 132 of the manual as suggested by Gem35 and found this "gem":

In each airstrike, one air group is designated as the lead group for that strike. If the lead air group fails to find the Target, all air groups in the airstrike will fail to locate the Target. A message will be shown if a group fails to find a Target after takeoff.

this is what I was thinking about also, so if there was a message that Vals failed to locate the target, then I doubt it was the same as if you have set fighters on Cap and none shows up in the air (which was called a bug by Mogami, not me). Looks like you have been super unlucky with this turn. Won´t happen you anymore in you whole WITP life! [;)]

[Mike Solli]

ORIGINAL: Dino

Well, I checked page 132 of the manual as suggested by Gem35 and found this "gem":

In each airstrike, one air group is designated as the lead group for that strike. If the lead air group fails to find the Target, all air groups in the airstrike will fail to locate the Target. A message will be shown if a group fails to find a Target after takeoff.

Wow Dino! [X(] I haven't read the manual in quite awhile, but that's a real shocker. [:(]

[mdiehl]

Sorry sir every pilot is going back to have a **** on deck since we can't find that Island we've been reconning for a week on end (no problem that recon plane finding it mind you).

This isn't totally without precedent though, at least in re historicity. Japanese strikes simply failed to find previously detected USN CVs on several occasions in 1942. And one strike launched by the USN at Midway simply failed to go anywhere near the Japanese CVs because the group leader of the lead plane basically followed a hunch that took him nowhere near the target.

The irony of this is that this aggressive action by me will now prevent my AV at the end of 1942

With respect, I can't help but say "Bravo, More of That." If WitP would make the Japanese player REALLY apprehensive every time the Japanese player in 1942 sends unspoorted carriers into waters controlled by enemy land bases and where US or UK carriers MIGHT be lurking nearby, it would be a much better consim than it currently is.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Wicked. Thanks Dino[;)]

You can see it now. Sorry sir every pilot is going back to have a **** on deck since we can't find that Island we've been reconning for a week on end (no problem that recon plane finding it mind you).

In all seriousness I am not mega p*ssed. I am surprised and VERY disappointed at how it worked out according to:

a.) As MDiehl says this normally turns out in WiTP.

b.) I had planned this well for 3 weeks and had fooled my father into thinking KB was elsewhere.

c.) The fact I have a mass of ace pilots against 4 x USN CV that were in a 'coastal' hex = 1/2 strike apparently.

I expect to lose between 3 and 4 CV's tops. The war has changed and my invasion of India is now scrapped.

The irony of this is that this aggressive action by me will now prevent my AV at the end of 1942 and may actually lead to a much better game since my Dad will have more of a chance despite his in-experience vs my experience.

As you were very unlucky with your strike perhaps you have got more luck with the damage control and IMO your carriers don´t look that bad. Bring them to Kwajalein, with a fleet HQ you have a level 7 port (if you built it up to 5 already). Then it shouldn´t be a problem to save all of them. Even as the Japanese I have seen CVs in far worse shape being saved. Good luck and keep us informed how the CVs are looking like in a couple of turns.

[Speedysteve]

Hi Castor,
 
Well Kwaj is only level 3 IIRC at present. We'll see. It depends how aggressive my Father is in his response. If he sends out his CV's then I doubt 3/4 will make it. The 'only' saving grace is that he lost 70 x F4F yesterday -= hopefully limited escorts IF he follows me.
 
I'm not hopeful of my CV's survival in this I must add.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Hi Castor,

Well Kwaj is only level 3 IIRC at present. We'll see. It depends how aggressive my Father is in his response. If he sends out his CV's then I doubt 3/4 will make it. The 'only' saving grace is that he lost 70 x F4F yesterday -= hopefully limited escorts IF he follows me.

I'm not hopeful of my CV's survival in this I must add.

Hi!

do you have at least the fleet HQ there? Fighting flt damage on ships in WITP can last weeks and perhaps you can increase the port size at least to 4 (+2 for the HQ) so you might consider bringing in an eng regiment and or a couple of construction btn to increase the port. Like I said, the flt damage didn´t look that bad at the time you took the screeny.

[castor troy]

If I had to guess, I would say at least 2 of the 3 damaged CVs from your screenshot will make it. Perhaps all 3 of them. How was the flt damage next turn? Fires increasing sys dam another 20 points and flt 10 points with the fires being out two turns later?

[Rainer]

That's not fair.
His dad should receive the same level of consulting [;)]

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Negative all were on 0% search since I had 35 x FP's on Naval search 100% range of 2-6.

Hmm, check the float plane squadrons, it's possible that all of them happened to be damaged on the turn in question, since there are just 1-2 planes on most ships. I generally set these squadrons to 50% to assure there are at least some planes in the air each turn. Setting them at 100% (especially around enemy fighters) can result in all of them being damaged rather quickly, and unless you check up on them each turn, you wouldn’t know about it.

I also make sure at least 1 squadron per CV has a 10% naval search setting as I believe it helps that CV’s recon level. I'm not 100% sure just how recon levels are tabulated, so having some of a CV’s bombers on naval search helps guarantee the strikes it launches gets the benefit of any possible bonus to its recon rolls.

It could be that the KB CV’s all launched a strike but failed to locate the target due to low recon levels. I’ve seen turns where every single search roll failed before, WitP has a bad habit of using the same roll for all searches sometimes (at least it seems that way sometimes), that could be what happened here. One bad search roll prevented all your strikes from locating the target.

Are all the bombers aboard their proper CV’s? If not, that proves they launched and failed to locate a target. Then they landed on the non-damaged CV’s when they returned.

Jim

[Speedysteve]

Hi Jim,
 
Regarding the FP's - I can verify this since I check them before I submitted the climatic turn. All FP's were operational at Range 6 search 100% - except Pete's on range 2 of course.
 
IIRC some of the bombers are on 'other' CV's.
 
Regarding the whole debacle i'm viewing it as a 'freak ' of war (unless Nik finds anythign untoward) and the war continues. My Dads will run his part tomorrow morning so we'll see.