Bombardment missions unstoppable?

Carriers At War is Strategic Studies Group famed simulation of Fleet Carrier Air and Naval Operations in the Pacific from 1941 - 1945.

Moderators: Gregor_SSG, alexs

Post Reply
User avatar
Oleg Mastruko
Posts: 4534
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

Bombardment missions unstoppable?

Post by Oleg Mastruko »

Bombardment missions are currently far far too easy to do and almost impossible to stop. Why?

- They almost never lose any speed even when heavily damaged (see the other thread "Speed?")

- They never give up - since morale isn't modelled they press on even if that means certain death

- Bombardments don't take any time, they require only a short "touchdown" - bang, arrive at hex, that's it bombardment done, as if it takes 2 minutes?

- Even if the enemy force is in the target hex, bombardment can be done (kinda simoultaneously with surface combat?)

- Even if the bombardment force loses all it's heavy ships, it can still bombard. In game terms, two damaged surviving DDs + one CA hanging on to last health bar arriving at target hex for 5 minutes work as well as the full bombardment force with heavy hitters.

I've tried all sorts of strategies but was never able to stop IJN bombardment no matter what I did, unless I wiped out every single ship of the bombardment force.

Suggestions:

- Make it so that you need heavy ships to do the bombardment. If the original force has BBs, if you lose them, or get them damaged beyond some level you CANNOT complete bomb mission. If the original force is based around CAs - if you lose CAs (or ideally, if they are damaged beyond certain level) you CANNOT do the bombardment. You can't effectivelly bombard with couple DDs!!

- Make bombardments TAKE TIME. 3-4 hours. Ideally, time to complete bomb mission would be dependable on how many "heavy hitters" you have left and their state of damage. Damaged ships should not bombard, and it should then take more time for the rest of TF to complete bombardment mission.

- Make it so that bombardment CANNOT be done until the defending surface force in the hex is somehow disposed of. With current system I tried sending surface TF to defend the airfield, but they never stopped the bombardment guys, even if they won surface battle (which happens rarely enough as it is).

Separate:

- Modelling speed loss within the damage model is a separate issue (see thread "Speed?") and doing something about it would be most welcome (even though I think we won't see it happen).

- Morale is beyond the scope of this game so I understand nothing can be done to instill fear of god into those stubborn Japanese, not even if they lose 70% of bombardment force in their approach [X(]
AlvinS
Posts: 659
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 10:00 am
Location: O'Fallon, Missouri
Contact:

RE: Bombardment missions unstoppable?

Post by AlvinS »

I think that once a TF has X percentage of ships damaged that it should attempt to retire, or at least detach the damaged ships from the bombardment force. I am not sure what the percentage should be.

I know we have the ability to detach damaged ships as a human player, so that a TF is not slowed down due to crippled ships, and the AI should do the same thing. Maybe it has to do with the bug where ships do not lose speed when damaged as noted in another thread.


Just my 2 cents.

I am still having a blast with the game. [8D]
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." ---Mark Twain

Naval Warfare Simulations

AlvinS
User avatar
WHLNH
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:15 pm
Location: Concord

RE: Bombardment missions unstoppable?

Post by WHLNH »

Yup, a bombardment force can be turned away. Playing the Americans, I stopped two of them from getting to Henderson, and what was left of them retreated. What really bugged me was the Jap carrier fleet never moved west to engage me while I sat between Gili-Gili and Henderson pounded the living s*^t out of the bombardment and invasion forces to Henderson (Gili-Gili too) .

Bill
User avatar
Panther Bait
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:59 pm

RE: Bombardment missions unstoppable?

Post by Panther Bait »

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

Suggestions:

- Make it so that you need heavy ships to do the bombardment. If the original force has BBs, if you lose them, or get them damaged beyond some level you CANNOT complete bomb mission. If the original force is based around CAs - if you lose CAs (or ideally, if they are damaged beyond certain level) you CANNOT do the bombardment. You can't effectivelly bombard with couple DDs!!

- Make bombardments TAKE TIME. 3-4 hours. Ideally, time to complete bomb mission would be dependable on how many "heavy hitters" you have left and their state of damage. Damaged ships should not bombard, and it should then take more time for the rest of TF to complete bombardment mission.

- Make it so that bombardment CANNOT be done until the defending surface force in the hex is somehow disposed of. With current system I tried sending surface TF to defend the airfield, but they never stopped the bombardment guys, even if they won surface battle (which happens rarely enough as it is).

Separate:

- Modelling speed loss within the damage model is a separate issue (see thread "Speed?") and doing something about it would be most welcome (even though I think we won't see it happen).

- Morale is beyond the scope of this game so I understand nothing can be done to instill fear of god into those stubborn Japanese, not even if they lose 70% of bombardment force in their approach [X(]

I just finished Morison's The Struggle for Guadalcanal, which is chockfull of bombardments by both the IJN and the Allies, and you are right that a defending surface force should most likely disrupt the bombardment. That assumes of course that the defending force is of the same rough size as the bombardment force. A couple of defending DDs may or may not disrupt a heavy cruiser force. Most of the bombardment TFs that ran into serious surface opposition seemed to turn around after the surface engagement, even if they won the surface engagement.

BTW, the IJN sent DDs to bombard Henderson Field quite often (often after dropping off supplies to the troops ashore), although their effectiveness was usually pretty poor. The small guns in DDs were just not effective without really good fire control, which was only possible during the day. The US Navy's daytime DD bombardments in support of ground combat on the island were effective, but they were in the day and had often had observers on land directing the fire. I do agree, though, that a bombardment TF built around CAs or BBs would likely turn around if the heavy hitters sank or had to turn around due to damage.

I don't think that your estimate of 3-4 hours for a bombardment mission is good though, assuming you are talking about the actual firing (i.e. not including final approach/exit). I don't think most of the Guadalcanal bombardments lasted much more than 1/2 hour. Capital ships can fire pretty fast and they just don't carry that much ammo or 3 or 4 hours of firing. Also, ships coming down the Slot wanted to be gone by morning to avoid any air attacks in retaliation.
When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard
Post Reply

Return to “Carriers At War”