BACK IN BUSINESS - PzB goes East again(st) Andy Mac

[PzB74]

No problem CT [:)]

Sorry to say so but low level heavy bomber attacks against ships is a joke and I would never play a game were hundreds of B-24's were used in this fashion.

If you want a challenging game as Allies against Japan you play scenario 2 - but if you implement unrestricted use of e.g. heavy bombers in a low level ship bombing role the game will be all but ruined. What is the meaning of nuking half the Jap navy with an uber weapon? Japan is the underdog and the uberdog don't need these tools to defeat Japan, in my opinion it ruins the game. That's my 2C and you won't see 4Es used in this fashion in this game.

Interesting turn today! Andy sends his mediums to bomb our para raiders.
We concentrate on hitting Chittagong, recon indicates large number of bombers and transports there.

The sweeps against Chittagong were very successful as we find Warhawks and Kitthyhawks in the air there.
15 P-40's and 6 Kittyhawks are claimed shot down. When a 20+ strong escort of Oscar's encounters 5 Mohawks we loose
5 Oscars without claiming a single Mohawk. To me it seems like the Air dev team has failed to make the Oscar the fighter is really was in 42.
- The Tojo is too good and the Oscar is useless.

On the ground we destroy 13 C-47 Skytrains and a P-39 Aircobra, but I've never encountered such a strong flak before!!
You said it was useless CT? I lost 10 Sally's bombing from 11k feet to flak today.

- Andy was very jubilant over his AA efforts and while surprisingly efficient today I think the sinking of a tanker is more serious than the loss of 10 Sally's.
The lessons must be that I increase attack height to 15k against Chittagong were Andy no doubt has brought in a lot of heavy artillery....

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Oct 29, 42

Sub Attacks

We sink a large tanker on the surface. Didn't it have an escort?
Love to sink these prime targets.

More and more US sub sightings and some attacks, but usually no hits or at best a dud hit.

Submarine attack near San Francisco at 210,86

Japanese Ships
SS I-36

Allied Ships
TK William H. Berg, Shell hits 1, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage

TK William H. Berg is sighted by SS I-36
SS I-36 attacking TK William H. Berg on the surface
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Amami Oshima at 101,66

Japanese Ships
xAK Kagu Maru
E Saga
DMS Taboko
AK Kyushu Maru
xAP Teison Maru
xAK Atutasan Maru
xAK Tacoma Maru
DD Kosugiri
DD Suresushio

Allied Ships
SS Wahoo

SS Wahoo launches 6 torpedoes at xAK Kagu Maru
DD Kosugiri fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Suresushio fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Kosugiri fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Kosugiri fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Kosugiri fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Kosugiri fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Aogashima at 112,67

Japanese Ships
CS Chitose
DD Akebono
DD Urakaze
DD Ushio

Allied Ships
SS Flying Fish

SS Flying Fish is sighted by escort
DD Ushio fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Ushio fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Ushio fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Ushio fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Ushio fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Pearl Harbor at 176,115

Japanese Ships
SS I-160

Allied Ships
DD Monssen
DD Hull
DD Lang

SS I-160 is located by DD Monssen
DD Hull fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Lang fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Kona at 176,121

Japanese Ships
SS I-160, hits 1

Allied Ships
DD Farenholt
DD Tucker

SS I-160 is sighted by escort
DD Tucker attacking submerged sub ....
DD Tucker cannot establish contact with SS I-160
DD Tucker loses contact with SS I-160
SS I-160 eludes DD Tucker by diving deep
SS I-160 eludes DD Tucker by diving deep
DD Tucker fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Tucker fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Tucker fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Tucker fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Kona at 176,121

Japanese Ships
SS I-160, hits 1

Allied Ships
DD Hughes
DD Arunta
DD Ralph Talbot

SS I-160 is sighted by escort
I-160 diving deep ....
DD Arunta attacking submerged sub ....
DD Arunta is out of ASW ammo
DD Arunta is out of ASW ammo
DD Arunta is out of ASW ammo
DD Ralph Talbot fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Arunta fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Arunta fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Arunta fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Arunta fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Air Combat

Morning Air attack on Chittagong , at 55,41
Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid spotted at 15 NM, estimated altitude 36,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 4 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 42

Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk IA x 9
P-40E Warhawk x 16

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-44-IIa Tojo: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Kittyhawk IA: 3 destroyed
P-40E Warhawk: 7 destroyed

Aircraft Attacking:
37 x Ki-44-IIa Tojo sweeping at 30000 feet *

CAP engaged:
AVG/3rd Sqn with P-40E Warhawk (0 airborne, 7 on standby, 0 scrambling)
7 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 9 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 29000 , scrambling fighters to 29000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 1 minutes
No.453 Sqn RAF with Kittyhawk IA (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 2 being recalled, 3 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 29000 , scrambling fighters to 29000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 41 minutes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Chittagong , at 55,41

Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid spotted at 30 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 8 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-21-IIa Sally x 52
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 27
Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 42

Allied aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-IIa Sally: 3 destroyed, 17 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
C-47 Skytrain: 5 destroyed on ground
P-39D Airacobra: 1 destroyed on ground

Airbase hits 2
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 19

Aircraft Attacking:
20 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 11000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb
29 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 11000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Chittagong , at 55,41
Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid spotted at 37 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-21-IIa Sally x 30
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 27

Allied aircraft
Mohawk IV x 5

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-IIa Sally: 1 destroyed, 15 damaged
Ki-43-Ic Oscar: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
C-47 Skytrain: 1 destroyed on ground

Airbase hits 1
Runway hits 7

Aircraft Attacking:
29 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 11000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb
11 x Ki-43-Ic Oscar sweeping at 11000 feet *

CAP engaged:
No.60 Sqn RAF with Mohawk IV (5 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(5 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
5 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 30000
Raid is overhead
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 3rd Raiding Regiment, at 58,34 (Rangpur)
Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid spotted at 45 NM, estimated altitude 20,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 15 minutes

Allied aircraft
Blenheim I x 9
Blenheim IV x 21

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
7 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
9 x Blenheim I bombing from 15000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
15 x Blenheim IV bombing from 15000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
6 x Blenheim IV bombing from 15000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 3rd Raiding Regiment, at 58,34 (Rangpur)
Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid spotted at 39 NM, estimated altitude 21,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Allied aircraft
Blenheim IV x 6

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
6 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x Blenheim IV bombing from 15000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Burma - Again

[MikeS4269]

I am left wondering what kind of briefing those paras had before going out on this particular mission....

I raise a glass in their honor.

May their sacrifice never be forgotten and may we forever sing their praises at the great Yasukuni Shrine!

Lb

[PzB74]

LoL! That's indeed true, but since this game is all about abstractions that was actually a mission initiated with Chandra Bose and Pro Japanese Indian soldiers that dropped into a few villages to encourage a patriotic war to free India of the Imperialists and install a more benign rule [;)]
 
In 1944 the entire 11th Division in the Pelieleus was ordered to kill as many Americans as possible. There would be no hope for salvation, just an oath to defend the Empire and the Emperor to the last bullot. And so it was...
 
It is in this contect I feel justified to undertake such missions as Japan, doing it as the Allies would be harder to justify.

[janh]

I think your air campaign in Burma is very promising.

From what I gather from other AARs (see Cannorebel, and other at this stage), the allied production of air frames at this point in time is still lagging behind your numbers, and it will keep that way from almost 6-12 months until Andy could "produce" parity.  I think these months you could use to attritt him in OZ and Burma.  His losses have been systematically almost a factor of 2-4 higher than yours.  He looses lots of pilots, especially when you are fighting on home territory with CAP.  Any pilot he looses now while you still have a chance to make him pay at a favorable loss rate is a pilot that will not gain experience to come up against you in 43 and 44 with much better planes.  So I would drive the campaign in Burma hard, and even try to organize a ground offensive.  He is binding tons of your heaviest units, and his unit numbers don't really tell you what true strength and troop numbers he is having there?   And I do not get the impression he is seriously advancing against you.  More like probing, maybe even just demonstrating.  Why not finally take the initiative back into your hands and engage him?

Same in the Indian Ocean.  Yes, the loss of 3 BB is bad for Japan.  And yes, I would be more careful now too.  Maybe having send them as raiders elsewhere they could have sunk a couple of TK and AK before getting sunk, and that would perhaps be worth more in the long shot?  Anyway, the age of BB is over, and you need to cover BB and CA always with LBA, of CV's.  I find you could make more use of your carriers, even if that burns a lot of fuel.   Now is the time where the RN and USN are still comparably weak, and have worse fighters than in a year from now.  So if you want to regain the initiative, and "drive Andy nuts", I would fight now.

Send KB to cover another BB SRON in Indian ocean, and raid Ceylon again.  Find the RN before Andy can send USN CV's from CentPac over.  Andy will likely not do so, nor will he attempt another badly prepared Palmyra disataster within ~3-5 months I would bet.  It will take him time to recover from that, and he probably is busy organizing an advance on Darwin, and of transfer idle units from AUS Zone 3 to CentPac to back up future amphib ops.   I would rush KB back from the Indian ocean exercise immediately, no matter whether you can bag the RN, and send 1 or 2 BB and CA out raiding the convoys in CentPac and EastPac, with KB hovering hidden behind.  If you hit a couple of convoys, he would likely be forced to commit the USN CV's to cover his routes of supply.  Maybe you get a favorble battle such as John 3rd just reported in his AAR?  That would be exactly the trick I would do.

Preserving fuel for later is likely wasting it, because later, when the allied advance begins in earnest, you will have interior lines and short routes.  And judging from other AARs, you won't be moving your ships a lot anymore anyways because of the allied air superiority.  By then, fuel is probably not your biggest problem anymore, but rather the much improved AAA armament of the allied ships compared to now, or the new Corsairs, Hellcats, Mustangs, Thunderbolts etc.  I think you navy is much more powerful and valuable compared to Andy's at this point, and now you need to go shopping with it...

[PzB74]

Yes indeed janh, we can have a lot of fun in the air in Burma over the next 6 months, but as mentioned the range from my main bases
and to enemy troops and rear airfields is so long that I can't get the full strength to bear. If Andy advance just another hex or two things will change drastically.

I also need to figure out what is inside that 26 units stack; all the units I've bombed thus far is division and brigade sized.
Any advance into that jungle north of the basin will be into the teeth of enemy bomber formations and as noticed, units move 2 miles a day.
The only option is an advance up the road to Akyab, but such a march also takes much time and until I know the enemy plans and strength I will wait.
- If and when the Army is committed the battle should already be all but won, can't afford any big FUBARS in Burma!

I do have plans for the Fleet as well, but would like to keep them for myself until further notice [;)]
It's not like I'm hoarding fuel, but any major offensive requires planning. Forward bases must be provided with fuel and replenishment fleets must be topped up
and placed along the fleets path. The fastest fleet oilers must also sortie with the fleet if required.

Sending battleships as raiders is too costly and risky, a single ship inflicts little damage on a huge enemy convoy.
The escorts will draw it into combat and ammo is quickly expended and there won't be a refill in thousands of miles. The sortie with the Chikuma in the beginning of the war
showed just this. If you wish to achieve something in AE you need carriers. Whether to strike against the British Eastern Fleet or the Americans in the Central Pacific then becomes
the big question. Do I want to send the KB to the Indian Ocean?

South of Tennant Creek a stack of 12 enemy units has been spotted towards Tennant.
- My next task is to identify these units and figure out whether to stand or attack.

[PzB74]

Found a few interesting links:

U.S. Ships Sunk or Damaged in Pacific Area during World War II

I looked up the William H. Berg, the tanker just sunk, and found an interesting story about Jap sub activity in 42.
The web page was messy and filled with adds and junk so I'll paste the article in here:

The War Off California by Michael Ellis

A Night to Remember On the evening of Monday, February 23rd, 1942, Ellwood, California is quiet.

The coastal oil refineries in the Ellwood Oil Field are mostly deserted except for some workmen still on duty. Most of their fellows have gone home, whilst others have gone to nearby Wheeler’s Inn to relax before retiring home for a night’s rest. Just after 7:00 PM the President begins his Fireside Chat, and the radio at Wheeler’s Inn is tuned to that broadcast. The tranquillity of the scene is ironic considering the events taking place elsewhere in the world. On the Eastern Front, the Red Army has retaken Dorogobuzh, a town about fifty miles east of Smolensk. President Franklin Roosevelt has just ordered General MacArthur to leave his beleaguered forces on Luzon and report to Australia. On the Sittang River in Burma, Japanese troops threaten to envelop the British Army’s 17th Indian Division as it attempts to withdraw under heavy fire. Singapore and its 100,000-strong garrison has fallen, and within the next two weeks, the Dutch stronghold on Java will follow. Admiral William Halsey’s meager naval task force based around the aircraft carrier Enterprise is approaching Wake Island, which fell to the Japanese onslaught two months previous.

And cruising silently off Ellwood is a lone, undetected Japanese submarine. Poised to Strike That submarine is HIJMSI-17 under the command of Japanese Navy Commander Kozo Nishino. Launched in 1939, I-17 displaces 3,654 tons submerged, employs a crew of 101 officers and men, and is armed with six 21” torpedo tubes with eleven spare torpedoes plus the six already in the tubes. When cruising at 16 knots, I 17 had a range of 14,000nm. She could also carry a single seaplane if her mission required her to do so. Finally, I-17 carried a single 5.5”/40 caliber (140mm) deck gun for surface attacks or shore bombardments. That deck gun will be employed to effect this night.

Commander Nishino knows the area around Ellwood well. Prior to the outbreak of hostilities, Nishino had captained an oil tanker which loaded at the Ellwood facility many times. The scene on the conning tower can be easily reconstructed. It has been three days sinceI-17 arrived on her patrol station off San Diego. So far, no shipping targets have been found. The crew, full of bushido, the Samurai warrior code, are no doubt itching for action. Nishino too is probably anxious for a chance to fight. The Japanese Empire has won victory after victory in the Pacific and even the most level headed in the High Command are affected by it. Soon this euphoric attitude will cause several disastrous miscalculations which will lead to Japan’s defeat. The staff officers will call it “victory disease.” On February 23rd, however, this is all in the future.

Now theI-17 is sailing off the Ellwood Oil Field. Nishino will probably be sweeping the horizon with his binoculars, his eyes keenly adjusted to the rapidly approaching darkness. Until the US Navy’s introduction of shipboard fire control radars later that year, the Japanese have the advantage in night actions, for their shipboard optics and lookout training are the best in the world.

The tall, pyramidal derricks of Ellwood’s oil wells come into sight. Nishino may have called down to his navigator to get his position, or maybe he knew already. The coast seems almost totally quiet, and there is no sign of armed opposition in the vicinity. “What to do now?”, Nishino doubtlessly wonders.

His mind probably drifts back to the days just after the Pearl Harbor attack when I-17 and seven of her sister submarines were deployed to positions off the U.S. West Coast. The submarine force’s commanding officer, Vice Admiral Shimizu, passes on instructions for the submarines to shell targets along the coast on Christmas Eve. This decision comes from the Imperial High Command. The operation is postponed until the 27th, and then finally cancelled outright. A key reason in the cancellation of the shelling is the fear of American reprisals if civilian areas such as Los Angeles or San Francisco are attacked.

As I-17 cuts through the sea unseen from the shore, Nishino makes his decision and calls down into the sub’s steel hull. “General Quarters! Action stations, guns!”
The disciplined crew quickly take up their positions. They will carry out a bombardment of the U.S. mainland, the first such attack since the War of 1812. Why Commander Nishino chooses to attack is not known with any certainty. Perhaps I-17’s other officers coaxed him into the decision, or he wants to goad a fight with any nearby American warships. One rumour which circulated after the war is that an incident of some sort took place when his tanker was loading at Ellwood. Angered by this incident, he now has a chance to take his revenge.

Ultimately, however, Nishino’s reason is of little concern. What is of real concern, however, is the fact that Nishino and the I-17 are about to cause quite a commotion in Southern California. “It started about 7:15…” Inside Wheeler’s Inn, dinner is being served to the patrons by the owner, Laurence Wheeler, and his staff. Franklin Roosevelt’s characteristic New England brogue is echoing from a radio set. During the broadcast, he claims: "…the broad oceans that have been heralded in the past as our protection from attack have become endless battlefields on which we are constantly being challenged by our enemies". As if to underline this statement in the most vivid manner possible, Nishino orders his gun crew to open fire. The first shells land in one of the refineries. The workmen on site are no doubt baffled momentarily. Maybe an underground gas pocket has caught fire and exploded violently to the surface. Perhaps a fifth-column saboteur dynamited something in the refinery. Several seconds later, another explosion rocks the area. They wonder what is happening.

Then someone spots the submarine out to sea. A witness, refinery workman G.O. Brown, later describes it as “so big that I thought it might be a destroyer or a cruiser.” Brown and the others race to inform the local authorities.
A shell sails over Wheeler’s Inn, and Laurence Wheeler telephones the Sheriff’s office. They tell Wheeler planes will be there in “ten minutes”, but no planes arrive. I-17 escapes undamaged. Around the same time, I-17 is observed by Reverend Arthur Basham of Pomona, California. Reverend Basham was visiting Montecito, about sixteen miles east of Ellwood. He later told the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s office that the submarine was: “…heading south toward Los Angeles and flashing lights as if it were attempting to signal with the shore.” Reports of lights flashing out to sea in the Santa Barbara-Ventura area are also reported. The Santa Barbara area is blacked out after the attack (the all-clear signal was given at 12:12 am.) I-17’s attack lasted somewhere around twenty minutes. Nishino’s crew fired between twelve and twenty-five 5.5” AP (armor-piercing) shells, causing little actual harm apart from a direct hit on an oil derrick and slight damage to a catwalk and a portion of the Ellwood Pier. The attack, first reported by the Associated Press Wire Service, sent a chill up the country’s spine. The next day’s Late City Edition of The New York Times carried the headline: SUBMARINE SHELLS CALIFORNIA OIL PLANT. The attack also exacerbated animosity towards the Japanese-American population of California, already at a critical point because of the attacks on Pearl Harbor. The Silent Hunters The bombardment of Ellwood was an unintended climax to the Japanese Navy’s submarine warfare campaign off the U.S. West Coast. Although Japanese submarine doctrine emphasized that submarines were intended to sink capital ships in order to weaken an enemy’s potential battle line, their captains would usually attack merchant shipping if the opportunity arose. Indeed, the first attack occurred before the first bombs fell on Pearl Harbor.

The steam schooner Cynthia Olson was about 1,000nm northwest of Diamond Head, Hawaii on December 7th when she was attacked at 8:00 am (Hawaiian Time) by the submarine I-26 under Commander Yokota. A shore station received an SOS signal from the Cynthia Olson reporting a submarine attack. This message was the last that was heard of both the Cynthia Olson and her 33 crew and passengers, which included two U.S. Army radio specialists, one of whom probably sent the SOS signal.

On the 11th, the freighter Lahaina was sunk 800nm of Honolulu by Lieutenant-Commander Fujii’s I-9. Four of the crew were killed, two from jumping overboard during the attack, and two dying from exposure during the ten days the survivors spent at sea before washing ashore at Kahtilui, Maui.

Several more ships were sunk close to Hawaii during December of 1941, but they are not as relevant as the sinking of the tanker Emidio on December 20th. A Prequel to Ellwood The Emidio, an oil tanker bound from Seattle to Ventura, was attacked by Nishino’sI-17 on the afternoon of the 20th at a position twenty miles off Blunts Reef. Lookouts aboard the Emidio spotted the submarine, but Nishino overtook the tanker and opened fire, forcing the Emidio’s captain, Clarke Arthur Farrow, to stop the ship. Nishino continued firing, one shell hitting #3 lifeboat and killing two of the crew. Three others died when another boat overturned. As the crew abandoned the tanker, a navy patrol bomber appeared overhead and attacked the fleeing I-17 with depth charges, which did no damage, but drove off the submarine. The tanker’s survivors were later rescued by the Coast Guard cutter Shawnee. The tanker did not sink immediately, however, and drifted aground near Crescent City, California, wrecking herself against the rocky shore. Two days previous to his attack on the Emidio, Nishino had attacked the San Diego bound freighter Samoa with torpedoes and her deck gun. The attack failed to damage the ship, however, and Samoa arrived in San Diego safely.

The same day as the Emidio was sunk, Lieutenant-Commander Shibata’s I-23 attacked the tanker Agwiworld off Santa Cruz, firing eight shots from her deck gun. However, the tanker’s captain managed to evade Shibata by zig-zaging. Agwiworld sought refuge in a nearby coastal anchorage and reached her destination safely a few days later.

On December 22nd, the I-19 under Lieutenant-Commander Narahara chased the oil tanker H.M. Storey for an hour before firing three torpedoes. All the torpedoes miss and the H.M. Storey escapes I-19, only to be sunk in May 1943 by I-25.
The next day saw Nishino’s I-17 attack the tanker Larry Doheny southwest of Cape
Mendocino. Nishino fires four shells at the tanker, causing some damage, but the appearance of a patrol plane forces him to dive. Later, he executes a torpedo attack against the tanker, but the torpedo detonates prematurely. The Larry Doheny escapes with minor damage.

Commander Matsumura’s I-21 had more success that day. He found the tanker Montebello off Cambria, California. A torpedo struck the tanker’s #2 hold and set the ship ablaze. Within twenty minutes the entire crew had begun to abandon ship. Matsumura fired several deck gun rounds into the burning tanker to speed her sinking. All hands from the Montebello survived. Later that day, I-21 attacked the tanker Idaho without success.

Monterey Bay was the site of another attack on December 24th. The steamer Dorothy Philips was attacked by I-23. The sub’s lookouts initially identify the Dorothy Philips as an old gunboat, but soon realize their mistake. I-23 shells the steamer, damaging her rudder and forcing the ship aground.

On December 25th, Narahara’s I-19 attacks the lumber carrier Absaroka about three miles off Point Vicente. One of the submarines torpedoes hits the #5 hold, causing extensive damage and forcing the crew to abandon ship. The Absaroka is later reboarded and towed back to San Pedro. I-19, meanwhile, attacks the Barbara Olson off San Pedro with torpedoes, but misses. She is counterattacked by a U.S. Navy coastal patrol vessel, but escapes without damage.

One final attack took place on the 28th, when Commander Tagami’s I-25 damaged the tanker Connecticut with a torpedo. Connecticut runs aground as a result of the torpedo, but is later salvaged. I-25 also attacked the tanker L.P. St. Clair on December 14th without effect.

By the end of December 1941, the Japanese submarines operating off the West Coast were low on fuel and provisions, and were ordered back to their bases in the Marshall Islands to resupply and refuel. Finally, on February 28th, five days after the attack on Ellwood, Nishino and the I-17 attacked the tanker William H. Berg with a torpedo which detonates prematurely. Although Nishino thinks he hit the tanker, in fact she escapes undamaged.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: PzB

No problem CT [:)]

Sorry to say so but low level heavy bomber attacks against ships is a joke and I would never play a game were hundreds of B-24's were used in this fashion.

you seem to misunderstand or miss something. [:D]

We´ve got a hr about no USAAF heavy bombers below 10000ft on nav attack. On 10000ft my USAAF heavy bombers and on 6000ft my USAAF medium bombers have dropped about 1800 500lb bombs during a couple of turns in a row for not a single hit on enemy shipping (from freighters to cruisers) - no joke, this with 70 navbomb skill. That were the turns when I decided to a) train my crews in lownav because they couldn´t hit something with 70 skill from 10000ft (4E) or from 6000ft (2E) and wait for my USN bombers to show up as well as my attack bombers

USN heavy bombers are allowed to do lownav attacks because that´s what they did in real life, same goes for USAAF medium bombers and the attack bombers attack at 100ft by default.

There aren´t hundreds of B-24 on lownav attack because USAAF isn´t allowed to do so. And I guess you have to admit that USN heavy bombers exactly did this in real life. About 3,437 times more often than Betties or Nells attacked with torps btw... [;)]


Operationally, the classic use of patrol bombers is to hunt down and sink enemy ships. The Privateer stepped easily into this role, the way having been paved by years of anti-submarine and anti-ship operations in Navy PB4Y-1 Liberators and USAAF B-24s equipped with a series of radar sets collectively known as "Low Altitude Bombing" sets. By WWII standards, the Privateer was lavishly equipped with an electronic suite that could be customized on a mix and match basis so that Privateers could be airborne communication platforms, radar and radio station hunter/killers, anti shipping search and destroy units, weather reconnaissance planes or search and rescue units to locate downed airmen with their radio direction finders. If the situation demanded, they could even act as their own standoff anti radar jamming unit.

Patrol craft are not glamorous, like fighter planes, or vital to the troops on the ground like bombers, close support attack planes, or the cargo planes that keep them supplied. What the Privateer lacked in pizzazz, it more than made up for in versatility and practicality. The Navy wanted the seas swept clear of enemy transport, enemy radars, enemy radio navigation aids, and enemy scouting vessels. It wanted mines planted, submarines harassed or destroyed, communications augmented and weather information for 1,300 miles around the Privateer's base. No other aircraft was as capable of this as the Privateer .



If you restrict USN heavy bombers from lownav attacks then you have to restrict Betties from using torps. It´s that easy. No, you could allow around 100-150 torpedoes dropped from Betties and that´s it then.


And regarding my question about flak, yes, in my game it´s useless. Stacked bases in Burma with 200+ 3.7 inch guns (all in combat mode of course) and the average kill numbers are 1,5 ac per attack out of 50+ bombers at 11000ft. In 4/43, Allied flak downed something like 500 Japanese ac, out of 5500 lost in total. Japanese flak downed something like 150 Allied ac out of 4500 total.

[PzB74]

The challenge with AE is that some weapons don't work as intended; either they hit anything at all or they hit to well and to much.
When you show results were a cruisers and 4 destroyers are sunk by 20-30 Liberators something is wrong.

"In addition to very long range patrols, the B-24 was vital for patrols of a radius less than 1,000 mi (1,600 km), in both the Atlantic and Pacific theaters where U.S. Navy Privateers and USAAF B-24s took a heavy toll of German and Japanese submarines, and also some Japanese surface shipping."

_Some_ Japanse surface shipping". I don't define wiping out fleets as some [;)]

Medium bombers like the B-25 was a more usual ship bomber in 43-44 and reflects a challenge to Japan in AE as well.

- If 4Es can be designed to score a few hits now and then, especially against slow and vulnerable targets --> fine.
Until this happens I think we need houserules to play a balanced game. If you wish to play a game without rules that's also fine, but then
this game can't be compared with others that have.

Let us leave it at that [:)]

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: PzB

The challenge with AE is that some weapons don't work as intended; either they hit anything or they hit to well and to much.
When you show results were a cruisers and 4 destroyers are sunk by 20-30 Liberators something is wrong.

Medium bombers like the B-25 was a more usual ship bomber in 43-44 and reflects a challenge to Japan in AE as well.

- If 4Es can be designed to score a few hits now and then, especially against slow and vulnerable targets --> fine.
Until this happens I think we need houserules to play a balanced game. If you wish to play a game without rules that's also fine, but then
this game can't be compared with others that have.

Let us leave it at that [:)]

to each his own, no problem. But you are aware of the Betties, Nells, Frances and Peggies and what you, me and other Japanese players did with them in WITP and AE. While I´m the same fanboy as you (I´m only playing the wrong side at the moment), there are these complaints on one side while we use this "special" weapon on and on and have been doing so for years. Everyone seems so used to these torp attacks that it seems it´s believed that this is how it was done in real life. A classic WITP or AE game sees hundreds of ships sunk by 18 inch aerial dropped torps, and that seems to be normal [;)]. Problem indeed is, that it was absolutely the other way around in real life. PB4Y on lownav attacks sunk far more ships than Betties did with torps and I´m sure you are as aware of that historic fact like I am. Now many if not most of these attacks happened during dawn or even at night, but how would the outcry look like when I would start setting these bombers to night attack and they would start hitting ships with the enemy totally unable to defend itself? [:D]

We´ve all read the same books and know what happened in real life, we´re only discussing small issues usually, while there usually is consens on the big picture. And the big picture is more or less what I´ve written above. No? Would there be an outcry if I post a combat report of 20 Betties sinking 3 or 4 Allied DDs with torps? You don´t need to answer this question, just think about it... [:'(]

[castor troy]

My last post on this issue in your AAR as this really goes into spamming your really interesting AAR and I don´t want to fed you up anyway. Below there´s something nice I´ve found about VPB-117, which was equipped with 15 PB4Y Privateers. You quote "some Japanese shipping was sunk by these bombers". Ok, it depends on how you quantify "some" of course. These are the stats and claims for ONE squadron, not for the entire USN heavy bomber force. And I bet this single squadron sunk more enemy ships than all Betties, Nells, Frances and Peggies together sunk with torps. Again, I´m a JFB just as you, but we should not ignore how it really was. [;)]

edit: this squadron was commissioned in early 44 btw, so we´re not talking about years of attacks, but one and a halve year of attacks.

[PzB74]

After seeing what a handful of stringbags (British torpedo bombers) could do to my battlefleet (sink 3 battleships and torpedo a light cruiser)
I must notice that the effectiveness of torpedo bombers on both side of the fence is rather high [8|] 

Yes, the Japs have more potentially dangerous torpedo planes but I haven't sunk many Allied ships with these planes in any of my 2 AE games (April / October 42). Obviously they're not able to wipe out fleets despite Japan's superior position (much better than it ever was in WWII).
- If you protect Allied ships with 10 fighters this will be enough to turn back most unescorted Japanese torpedo bomber attacks. The Nells is Japan's answer to the Sherman tank...one hit and it blows! The big problem with 4E's is that you need 100 fighters to shoot down 10 and the bombers always get through. Combined with a high low level ship attack hit % 4E's can be made into uber weapons.
 
If the devs reduced hit probability for all torpedo bombers in the game I wouldn't mind, but there's fine little to do about it otherwise.
- As I said before, if you wish to play a challenging game as Allies you don't find an unbalance in the game and use it to break your opponent.
Nell's and Bettie's don't break the game, neither do Kate's but they can seriously hurt you in 42-43 unless you're careful, especially before you reduce the KB.
 
Yes, I've used Jap Betties and Nells in WitP to slaughter poor Al's british battleships in port at night [:'(], but we've all learned from these experiences and tried to address the worst abnormalities.
 
In general I see your points CT, but sometimes I think you drive things a little fast and a little too far.
I'm the typical "centre of the road" guy that is looking for balance. I notice things that I think require tweaking but I seldom conceive them as broken.
After seeing 10 Sally's out of 70 shot down by flak in one mission I will continue to evaluate their efficiency in different settings before making up my mind.

[PzB74]

Nice find! [:)] Yes the Privateer's probably caused much damage in 44-45, most likely against coastal convoys and poorly escorted / protected ships, however the list don't break down the claims into types and it's also impossible to verify these claims.

You should also remember that it's far easier to achieve good results when the enemy already is on his knees and broken.
In 42 Japan got elite torpedo bombers and achieve fairly good results as long as the Allies are reeling. Just observe how their efficiency sinks as pilot quality decrease and opposition increase.

I don't mind seeing such Privateer's in AE in 44-45 that is a threat to single ships and coastal convoys.
What I hope not to see is B-24s (not Privateers) in 42-44 wiping out whole naval squadrons and completely upsetting the game balance.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: PzB

Nice find! [:)] Yes the Privateer's probably caused much damage in 44-45, most likely against coastal convoys and poorly escorted / protected ships, however the list don't break down the claims into types and it's also impossible to verify these claims.

You should also remember that it's far easier to achieve good results when the enemy already is on his knees and broken.
In 42 Japan got elite torpedo bombers and achieve fairly good results as long as the Allies are reeling. Just observe how their efficiency sinks as pilot quality decrease and opposition increase.

I don't mind seeing such Privateer's in AE in 44-45 that is a threat to single ships and coastal convoys.
What I hope not to see is B-24s (not Privateers) in 42-44 wiping out whole naval squadrons and completely upsetting the game balance.

which you wouldn´t in my PBEM because that is restricted with a hr. To go back to start, what I wanted to do is to warn you about USN heavy bombers - aka Privateers - and USAAF medium bombers on low nav attack (if Andy trains his crews to do so).

[PzB74]

Appreciate that CT! I was a bit confused as to whether you mean the Privateer (PB4Y-2) or the PB4Y-1 Liberator.
In your example that knocks out a CL and 4 DDs it is the PB4Y-1 that is in action.

I agree that the Privateer and B-25 should be a potent weapon by 1944, but it should still not be able to hit agile and fast warships from 1000 feet.
It will be a good question to ask both Al and Andy what will be their view on using the Privateer as a low level naval bomber.

[paullus99]

I would tend to disagree, though the mechanics of the game may not match historical results - because B-25s could and did shred destroyers from almost wave-top heights with their multiple .50cals.

[witpqs]

BTW that squadron example looks like the average ship target was 500 to 600 tons. Tiny by AE standards. Must have been slow and with no or virtually no AA.

[Mistmatz]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

BTW that squadron example looks like the average ship target was 500 to 600 tons. Tiny by AE standards. Must have been slow and with no or virtually no AA.

Thats what I thought as well. Probably a lot of fishing trawlers in this list...

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: PzB

After seeing what a handful of stringbags (British torpedo bombers) could do to my battlefleet (sink 3 battleships and torpedo a light cruiser)
I must notice that the effectiveness of torpedo bombers on both side of the fence is rather high [8|] 

Yes, the Japs have more potentially dangerous torpedo planes but I haven't sunk many Allied ships with these planes in any of my 2 AE games (April / October 42). Obviously they're not able to wipe out fleets despite Japan's superior position (much better than it ever was in WWII).
- If you protect Allied ships with 10 fighters this will be enough to turn back most unescorted Japanese torpedo bomber attacks. The Nells is Japan's answer to the Sherman tank...one hit and it blows! The big problem with 4E's is that you need 100 fighters to shoot down 10 and the bombers always get through. Combined with a high low level ship attack hit % 4E's can be made into uber weapons.

If the devs reduced hit probability for all torpedo bombers in the game I wouldn't mind, but there's fine little to do about it otherwise.
- As I said before, if you wish to play a challenging game as Allies you don't find an unbalance in the game and use it to break your opponent.
Nell's and Bettie's don't break the game, neither do Kate's but they can seriously hurt you in 42-43 unless you're careful, especially before you reduce the KB.

Yes, I've used Jap Betties and Nells in WitP to slaughter poor Al's british battleships in port at night [:'(], but we've all learned from these experiences and tried to address the worst abnormalities.

In general I see your points CT, but sometimes I think you drive things a little fast and a little too far.
I'm the typical "centre of the road" guy that is looking for balance. I notice things that I think require tweaking but I seldom conceive them as broken.
After seeing 10 Sally's out of 70 shot down by flak in one mission I will continue to evaluate their efficiency in different settings before making up my mind.

I think it is a function of experience more than anything else and do not feel that torpedo bombers are that deadly. I just had a two day battle where I had over 100 torpedo bombers attack numerous warships CAs and DDs in various TF with only one hit. They all had torpedo skills in the 50 to high 60 range. Average but not great. Avengers have better torp dud rate than Allied subs but it is not that good. My beauforts have better but they got no hits. I am betting that Andy hit you with very highly trained pilots with very good torpedoes. Your old BBs are not that fast and don't have very good AA protection and you had no CAP. The results were great for him but not unreasonable. You gave him an excellent setup and he got an excellent die roll.

I am beginning to think that avengers are better used vs ships as level bombers.

Meanwhile my pilots are slated for some more training.....[:D]

[PzB74]

Mmm, much food for thought and it's hard to draw any immediate conclusions.
- Let's observe how things work out in the time to come.

KB's Kate pilots are also very experienced, this also applies for the original batch of Betty - Nell pilots, but I will never get more of these.

I've mentioned my 2c about Privateers to Andy and asked about him.
Since we got a general rule against 4Es on naval attack below 10k feet I'd be willing to consider different rules for a given number of Privateer squadrons trained
for naval combat. A few units to begin with for test purpose perhaps.

FYI: When changing squadron size for air units onboard carriers I experience that the mouse pointer dissappears.
Have to Alt-Tab in and out for it to come back and when I did this twice the game crashed...Anyone else with similar experiences?

Andy says that he epxeriences crashes when he change HQ many times.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: PzB

FYI: When changing squadron size for air units onboard carriers I experience that the mouse pointer dissappears.
Have to Alt-Tab in and out for it to come back and when I did this twice the game crashed...Anyone else with similar experiences?

Andy says that he epxeriences crashes when he change HQ many times.

No, but I have plenty of crashes. No particular action involved. If you are clicking exactly at the right time when the screen is sort of blinking - like it is getting back focus although it never lost it - then it crashes. If your click is a little off in time, then you just get a hesitation. See the thread in Tech Support. I know they worked it pretty hard but must not have made any progress or it would have been in the patch.