Ocean of (Allied) Blood.

[BBfanboy]

True enough that the game makes 4E bombers too tough to shoot down an historical rates and too good at night bombing [at least for 1941-43 levels of training and technology]. Regardless of good maps and familiarity, you still have to be able to see some landmarks to find your target area and are unlikely to see an aircraft sitting off the runway in the weeds.
However, there are other gamey things that favor the IJN - much more effective flak throughout the game that takes a heavy toll on low flying carrier DBs and TBs for example. There is no house rule you can use to compensate for this programming - you just have to live with it. Similarly, to make the game more balanced for the IJN player the programmers have given them better ASW than historical and frequent dominance in surface actions against ships that ought to outclass them.
No one can reasonably tone down these factors unless they just avoid contact with the enemy - not much fun in that![>:] It seems the best solution is for both players to accept the game "as is" and make the best of their advantages while trying to counter the other side's superpowers.

[vicberg]

We need to differentiate between game balancing mechanisms and bugs. Every game tries to create some type of balance, whether historically accurate or not. The japanese are much more uber than historical because without the balancing, no one would play the game (expect maybe a few hard core gamers). Matrix is a business. They need to sell games. A completely one sided game won't sell. Auto-victory, pdu, mods, scenario #2 are game balancing. ASW is game balancing because without it, there'd be no jap merchant shipping after 43. Is flak a bug or game balancing? Hard to tell. I won't argue either side, though I'd guess it's probably game balancing. In spite of these items, the japanese still have little chance to win. Everyone knows that. So the game is STILL one-sided, though not to the extent that history dictates.

The fundamental problem with 4E bug is that it removes one of the two japanese early war advantages, naval power and air power. 4E negates japanese air power. In 42, that's more than something to simply accept as part of the game and made worse if it's exploited via night attacks. Trust me, I accept the game as is. But if I spent time planning a detailed ops like invading PH in early 42 and carried it off only to find out I'm screwed because of a bug that doesn't allow me to do anything about it other than suicide attacks, I'd be pissed.

[vettim89]

While I accept some of what you are saying here vicberg, I would like to counter with one very important point. The reason Yuabri's night raids were successful is that the target air base is 250 nm from the largest American air base in the Pacific. That close, ops losses and fatigue have got to be very low. Ergo, he can just keep pounding Hilo to dust for very little cost. Again, the Hawaiian invasion was very bold but also very risky. This is why it is risky.

Of note, even with the nighly raids Fat R has built Hilo from level 2 to 4 in what a week? To me for the Japanese to be able to do that is the ultimately expression of the overstated base building routine allows. Yes, there are compromises to be made in the name of good sportsmanship, but to pick one game flaw/inaccuracy and disallow it when, at this point, its the only thing Yubari has going for him seems to be asking a lot.

Ultimately, its Yubari's decision to make.

[yubari]

An interesting discussion Gentlemen.

We are back on with the game. FatR will not using the leaking CAP sweeps over Lihue and I shall continue with the night bombing. If it appears to be too powerful, then I shall moderate it. This could possibly be just using 2 engine bombers on night attacks, or I could use only a limited number of B-17E squadrons on night attack. As I said earlier, I do not really want to use an overpowered tactic to achieve victory. For the next turn, the 2 engine bombers will be attacking alone, and then the B-17s shall attack the turn afterwards.

On the West Coast, the Yorktown class are just two days away from being active, and the Saratoga needs another 5 days of repair. The US battleline left San Francisco this turn, I will try to use it in the waters around Kona if the KB is not spotted. A collection of allied cruisers are beginning to congregate at Pearl Harbour, including the two task forces that raided Johnston and Midway in the last week. There is no sighting of the KB, it could be heading back to Kwajalein for refueling and more planes. There is a radio intercept of a fleet around 15 hexes north west of Palmyra, but no information beyond that.

The picture shows the position of the Royal navy in the Dutch East Indies. The three carriers can be seen two hexes to the northwest of the "Straits of Malacca" hex and the Prince of Wales and Repulse are at Sabang, somehow they have managed to move nine hexes since the battle last turn. You can see the position of the Japanese ships, sadly there was no battleship in the fleet as my recon suggested.

All of my ships are now set to retreat at full speed, they should all be safely out of Zero range tomorrow. I expect the mini KB to try to attack at Columbo now, so I might move the Royal Navy back to Bombay for the next month or two, they will not be strong enough to attempt to interdict any Indian invasion. Interestingly, my recon shows nearly 300 ships in Singapore harbour, a mighty invasion fleet?

[topeverest]

That intel on KB is all I would need in Hawaii to strike. Now is the time to bombard with those cruisers! This is your chance. Get a TF with 25 ships from PH, as heavy as you can make them. BB if available. Expect heavy covering naval forces. Pick best commander and bombard. Set retirement auto disband and dont refuel. escorts to bombard range 1. That is a maximum chance at maximum naval inflicted damage. If you have enough ships, I would do both enemy bases on the same turn.

keep an eye on zingers Probably for DEI, but if it is to India / Celyon...well I would be preparing now. Look for intel. I would pool invasion reaction navy, land units, and air forces in a place your opponent is not likely to find but able to react to invasions of Celyon or eastern india.

I do not recall where you have your BB's and major surface fleets beyond POW and R - a disucssion and planned tactics would be nice. In any event, I would be throwing them in at this point. You have the bulk of his CV forces spotted. great time to strike. Anywhere you can get 1 to 1 in anything but CV's is an excellent oppornunity to shorten the life of the Empire. regarding running away from miniKB if in indian waters? You should set ambush and throw everything at them if they get beyond the protection of LBA. That force is not unbeatable.

[yubari]

Yes topeverest, barring a sudden reappearance of the KB I will try a large attack hopefully on the 12th or 13th of April. My battleships are organised into two fleets. The British Prince of Wales, Repulse, Resolution, Royal Sovereign and Ramillies are with the British carriers and are currently 18 hexes from Columbo and running short on fuel and torpedoes. Resolution took moderate damage from a torpedo.

The Colorado, Idaho, New Mexico, Mississippi and Warspite are 45 hexes from Pearl Harbour, or about 6 days travel at cruise speed. This task force is I think unspotted. It is easy to get cruiser groups into Pearl Harbour unspotted due to their speed but Mavises would surely spot any battleships approaching. The Japanese have at Kona around 25 warships, of which recon suggests around 6 are cruisers. The Zero CAP is pretty much impenetrable.

The mini KB contains the Ryujo, Shoho, Zuiho, Taiyo and Hosho for a total of around 160 planes. I am assuming that the Junyo (58 planes) and the Nisshin (30 planes) will also be available to make a total of around 250 planes. I don't think that the British carriers with just 100 planes can challenge that, but I shall certainly try to hit the supply train if the mini KB loiters too long around the landing point.

Hawaii.
I tried to attack with only 2 engine bombers on the 6th and they made just one bomb hit. An attack involving just three B-17 squadrons plus the 2 engines on the 7th scored around 20 bomb hits and destroyed 3 Zeroes on the ground, entirely reasonable results I feel, so I shall continue with this in the future. Kona airfield is now at level 5.

The US battleships have left San Francisco and should be at Pearl Harbour in around 6 days time. Importantly, I do not think that they have been spotted. The Yorktown class has finished its upgrades along with the Lexington. The Saratoga is just three days away from being ready, I shall send the carriers out in two days time and let the Saratoga move one day at full speed, time is of the essence here.

Sigint spots an engineer unit that had previously been planning for Lihue heading towards Kwajalein, there could be an attempted landing there in a week or two. There are also reports of heavy radio traffic at Kwajalein, which could possibly be the KB although it would have had to have moved very fast to get there: it has not been seen since the 4th April when the Akagi was torpedoed. There look to be about four to six Japanese cruisers at Kona, I want to use the USN to take these out so that I can use naval bombardments to destroy Kona airfield.

DEI.
There are lots of destroyers operating in the Straits of Malacca, no doubt trying to attack the large numbers of submarines I have there. The number of ships at Singapore is now over 300, and recon shows at least 10 of them to be AKs. A task force of three battleships is also spotted.

At sea, a US submarine puts another torpedo into the Yura and it is now confirmed sunk. A Japanese submarine also torpedoes the BB Resolution, only a few system damage points and 12 major floatation are caused, but it will be enough to keep it out of the war for about 6 weeks.

The three Dutch redoubts all survive. Malang is now back to forts level 3, and there have been no attacks at Balikpapan or Bandjermasin.

India.
Preparations are being made for the Indian invasion. Looking at the map, it is too late to invade on the west coast, there are only 23 days left of the invasion bonus. The most logical place to land would seem to be Vizgapatnam, it is relatively isolated from other air bases in India. However two divisions have been previously spotted planning for Diamond Harbour. At the moment, there are roughly 2600AV on Ceylon and another 3000 or so in India, around two thirds of this force is Indian Infantry, and still less than the magical 50 experience. I have to assume that FatR is bringing at least 4000AV.

China.
Japan retreats another Chinese corps in the north of the country. I had set it to move as a diversion and then forgot about it, another 10000 troops are lost. In the south, the Japanese retake Pucheng.

Japanese carriers.
I carried out a detailed hex count to try to guess the position of the Japanese carriers. My best guess is that the mini KB is around Jolo, I have set 5 submarines in the area to scout for it. I think that the KB is around 12 hexes from Kwajalein so it could probably get back to Kona for around the 16th April.

[topeverest]

Yubari,

You definately seem to have the upper hand in Hawaii. Even if your bombardment & ship to ship loses 2 to 1 against, which you wont, you still can replace the losses. japan cannot. The most important thing IMHO is to sink as many combat vessals and kill as many pilots from KB in 42 before the enemy hunkers down into defensive mode. Anything else is a bonus. Use low moonlight turns after you have surface radar to limit Jap advantage. Mix untested and tested ships in each TF to better harmonize performance.

When the India invasion happens, if it happens, there will be no point holding back any british or DEI navy. I think that invasion also should play well into your hands. Let me suggest you think about how you plan to deploy your naval and air forces. Narrowing down the invasion location would be a great help.

[janh]

I don't know why FatR stopped posting completely his part of the AAR, but it makes me think you are up for a really nasty big surprise.  But this will make this AAR more interesting than ever!! 

Nothing would be more boring than the Allied side gaining the upper hand so early in the war -- then the rest would reduce to the equations of attrition.   The Allied side must basically always win, but I like it best if it is really close to the last moment.  That's why I am often bored by players hording their CV's for the perfect moment to strike with all "599 million of them in a perfectly planned 7 hex attack tactic".  I find, compared to most AAR's, that historically the USN and IJN did split their CV div's more often and use them in small TFs and riskier operations.  Think of all the naval engagements preceding "Operation Watchtower" and the naval actions around the Coral Sea and Guadalcanal.  Plenty of separate CV engagements, which USN feeding ships into the fray pretty much as they arrive.  Yet I cannot recall an AAR where players have been playing in a similar fashion.  Rather most would wait until mid-43, until a substantial CV could be gathered, before attacking the Solomons.  Why is that?  What aspect, or approximation is leading to this "gamey" behavior?  Or is it just a wrong impression?

[Walloc]

Havent read the AAR for the last few days, then i stumbled on the night bombing discussion. My opinion greatly differs with the prevailing opinions given so i thot i'd give it.

My 2 cents on the night AF/port bombardment. Its very gamey and show me one historic example of succesfull night bombings of such type targets. To the extend its possible to do regulary in game. U historicly didnt see prolonged night bombing campaigns vs AF causing the kinda aircraft caulties u see in game, simply cuz it didnt work. Nor did u even see single attacks on that type of targets. IMO its an error that it works in the game and ofc then an exploit. My experience is that while overstacking matters u can still achieve amazing results without overstacking. The modifier for doing night bombing vs ports/AF is way off. Personally i dont understand, why the dev teams, if it was remotely possible, didnt make the modifiers doing high altitude and night bombings to a point where ppl simply wouldnt use them as they modifier should make them useless vs tactical targets.
If some thing pays to do, players will do it. Thats how players are by nature. Sure culture then might create a situasion where there is a general consensus on what is gamey, but thats a process.
I dont really buy the argument dont play players that do it, but then opinions will differ on that and i recogniese that.
In the end its the devs that made the game and it is their vision. Gota respect that, but that doesnt mean other ppl cant have another opinion on how they view the design.

All those arguments of well this and this is gamey too, doesnt cut it with me. It might be true, but one wrong doesnt make another wrong right. Especially since the other wrongs mentioned at leased has some historic basis for them, tho maybe overstated.

That said i will always suggest a HR against such to my opponents but if they refuse than i have no problem with using it if they used it to me first. Yes im aware how that sounds compared to above. That said i dont know how ur HR/ game has been so far as far as night bombings go.
My opinion would be if opponents has used it he has opened pandoras box, but i would never use it first. No matter the situasion.

On another matter i dont hope he quits, any time soon. If its true, and lets see if it is. It would be pathetic. I mean he made this riscky move. He knew that and u gota live with the consequences of ur actions or dont make them. The go for all or bust and if bust i just quite kinda mentality. Well as said is IMO pathetic. I have no problem with ppl wanting to win and going for it. Just live with it, if it doesnt play out as u want and not only go on in the games where it by luck or what ever works out.


Kind regards,

Rasmus

[Walloc]

ORIGINAL: vettim89

While I accept some of what you are saying here vicberg, I would like to counter with one very important point. The reason Yuabri's night raids were successful is that the target air base is 250 nm from the largest American air base in the Pacific. That close, ops losses and fatigue have got to be very low. Ergo, he can just keep pounding Hilo to dust for very little cost. Again, the Hawaiian invasion was very bold but also very risky. This is why it is risky.

Of note, even with the nighly raids Fat R has built Hilo from level 2 to 4 in what a week? To me for the Japanese to be able to do that is the ultimately expression of the overstated base building routine allows. Yes, there are compromises to be made in the name of good sportsmanship, but to pick one game flaw/inaccuracy and disallow it when, at this point, its the only thing Yubari has going for him seems to be asking a lot.

Ultimately, its Yubari's decision to make.

Vettim, while valueing ur opinion i dont IMO not a single of those arguements holds any water, but rationalizations of why it should work.
Historicly u had hundres of example of where the above was correct and that didnt lead to any night AF bombing campaigns causing significant aircraft casulties.
Lots of allied and japanease airfields was under daily attacks and still got build up. Henderson field, PM and so on. The attacks didnt stop the AF from building up. Not to mention ETO. The build rates goes both ways and helps the allied when they advance.

The size of AF nor that distance had any thing to do with whether presicion night bombing AF was feasible to do, what so ever.
IN ETO the whole allied strategy of going after LW figthers had 1000s of cases where the above was true. U never saw night bombing AFs killing aircraft as a remote possibilty. Nor was it an option in PTO when it ur above conditions was met.
Its an exploit( yes ofc ppl might differ with me on that) and nothing else to say. That u are hard pressed dont make an exploit less of an exploit.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: janh

I don't know why FatR stopped posting completely his part of the AAR, but it makes me think you are up for a really nasty big surprise.  But this will make this AAR more interesting than ever!! 

Nothing would be more boring than the Allied side gaining the upper hand so early in the war -- then the rest would reduce to the equations of attrition.   The Allied side must basically always win, but I like it best if it is really close to the last moment.  That's why I am often bored by players hording their CV's for the perfect moment to strike with all "599 million of them in a perfectly planned 7 hex attack tactic".  I find, compared to most AAR's, that historically the USN and IJN did split their CV div's more often and use them in small TFs and riskier operations.  Think of all the naval engagements preceding "Operation Watchtower" and the naval actions around the Coral Sea and Guadalcanal.  Plenty of separate CV engagements, which USN feeding ships into the fray pretty much as they arrive.  Yet I cannot recall an AAR where players have been playing in a similar fashion.  Rather most would wait until mid-43, until a substantial CV could be gathered, before attacking the Solomons.  Why is that?  What aspect, or approximation is leading to this "gamey" behavior?  Or is it just a wrong impression?

I have read around 15 AARs and have an impression of what the players are saying about the game model. There are two factors that make allied players hoard their carriers: - the Japanese Über CAP gives little chance that a small strike [less than 4 carriers combined] will get through while ensuring horrendous aircraft losses
- replacement aircraft for the Allies early in the war are very scarce. One heavy engagement could cripple the CVs for months for lack of aircraft, even if they didn't get creamed by the longer-ranged Kates and Vals.

On the IJN side, most players know only too well that loss of a couple of carriers in 1942 would put them at a severe disadvantage in 1943, whereas having all of them available plus new construction gives near parity with the Allies into 1944. The best way to avoid losses is to mass them so that the Allies do not dare approach.

Having said that, I agree with you that games with many risky operations are more dramatic and fun to follow than those with only a few huge, well-supported ones. I especially like when the AAR author does not say exactly what he is planning until he springs the surprise - keeps us all guessing.

[witpqs]

Rasmus,

The developers probably could/should adjust night bombing success somewhat but there are multiple counter-measures available and both sides can do it. In my PBM we both do it but within limits. Yes it might have results 'different than IRL' right now, but it's not gamey unless you over-use it. Also from what I have seen the results are quite variable, with good results being less usual. Putting even day-fighters on night duty does reduce the bombers' success.

[Walloc]

Hi Witpqs,

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Rasmus,

The developers probably could/should adjust night bombing success somewhat but there are multiple counter-measures available and both sides can do it.

I agree, but chances are that developers arent gona. So its up to players to regulate it, if any regulation is needed/wanted.

In my PBM we both do it but within limits. Yes it might have results 'different than IRL' right now, but it's not gamey unless you over-use it.

Im not telling u how u and ur PBM partner should play the game. Its naturally up too u 2 to decide. There was a discussion on the subject and i gave my opinion. U guys want it in the game, have it in game[:)]

Apart from some washmachine charlie single plane night bombing simply wasnt a thing done and certainly not any sustained effords. Only other examples i know of was some russian attacks where as i know it. Only a single attack had any real effect, why it didnt and wasnt gona be a widely used tactic. Let alone a succesfull one. IMO simply cuz it wouldnt have work doing "precison" bombing at night vs tactical targets. So historicly it wasnt really an option.

Having a little is to me a slippery slope. When is a little historic, when it wasnt used at all, and whats stopping it from crossing the border to being to much. Only very subjective opinions.

Overall problem as ably IMO shown in this example. Is that when day bombing an AF isnt a choice, the player as shown here resorts to a tactic of night bombing. Thats IMO a throughly unhistoric thot process. Historic if u couldnt bomb it by day u didnt bomb it, periode. As i see Yubaris thot process and feel free to correct if im wrong. It seems to me that the thot process in this particular situasion is exactly that. I cant bomb the AF by day so ill make an sustained night bombing campaign. To me thats the alrdy down the slippery slope at a fast pace. Later in game when the jap player knows u cant really do day bombings cuz of allied superiority whats, since pandora's box is alrdy open, is to stop the jap player and with reason since if player A can do it why cant player B. Resorting to night time AF bombings campaigns.
It becomes a viable tactic, it simply wasnt RL, no matter distance, AF level, moonlight and so on. This to me is just after rationalizing it cuz it work in game so it might have had in RL. Problem is that these wasnt the limiting factors in RL. As there are no historical basis whats so ever, even with these factors that it was ever used vs tactical targets. The limiters was of other sorts.

Its just my word of caution to Yubari and any one else, as i see it. Allowing the tactic, you might very well set ur self on a slippery slope and would u be happy about the end results.

Also from what I have seen the results are quite variable, with good results being less usual. Putting even day-fighters on night duty does reduce the bombers' success.

Yup, there are counter measures but they arent IMO that effective, but some what so ofc go ahead and use them. As seen when Yubari attack the non overstacked AF he still cause 5-6ish plane losses. Thats possibly 100-150+ lost planes in a sustained campaign per month vs just one base. Thats as far as i've seen, figur wise, more than the german losses from russian AF attacks through out the entire war.

Highjack /off

Rasmus

[witpqs]

{Hijack back on! [;)]}

Hi Rasmus!

Never thought you were trying to push house rules on others, sorry if I gave that impression.

Much of what you say is true, but not in the absolute degree in which you assert it. For example, night bombing was done. Saying that a player who chooses to night bomb is using an unhistorical decision process is not accurate. IRL night bombing was not done for fun, it was done because bombing during the day was deemed impossible/impractical/wasn't working, so the player is using exactly the same decision making process.

The effectiveness of night bombing in the game versus IRL is certainly a valid question. Flowing from there, how should it be used in the game?

In my PBM we have some lengthy experience with night bombing, and the results are not in line with what you seem to be thinking. As I recall it we are seeing a great deal of variability, with effective raids being less usual. Also in contrast to what you have seen, counter-measures do have a meaningful impact on the effects of the raids. Even day-fighters help to reduce the damage from raids over the long term. Definitely damage from night raids is far less than from day raids, even when the night raids are unopposed.

IMO a ban on night bombing would detract from the game. Short of a ban, what house rules on night bombing would you support?

{Hijack off}

[janh]

My two cents:  Ask yourself the question why the British Bomber Command never conducted night raids against "point targets" like airfields, barracks, etc.  With hundreds of heavily armed, 4E bombers available by 1943, why wouldn't they just shut down the airfields over the entire northern Germany in one or two night raids, before then sending in the USAAF daylight raids without escort but also without significant opposition.  Or why the hit criterium for a bomber crew on night raids was hitting an 8km (needs confirmation, might have been 10) radius around the target site?
I have the impression that the guys that presently try to mod WITP-AE into European War game (where did they ever disappear?), will run into exactly that problem with the present air model in AE.  I cannot say of course where this come from, but something seems to be off with the efficiencies of night and day bombing.  Maybe it is just wrong impression.  It just feels like: "Why the hell didn't McArthur close Rabaul from August 1942 if the 4E are so sheer indestructible and efficient in closing down airfields, and reduce it as base for naval interdiction?"

[vettim89]

I can see both sides of the argument here but I go back to my orginal post on the topic. This is the Reluctant Admiral Mod. If you are unfamiliar with it, you might run over to either the thread in the Scenario Design and Mod Forum or just look at John 3's "Days of Infamy" AAR where he gives the low down on the first page. This mod is a JFB wet dream. He gets basically everything the Japanese lacked in the war from extra CV's to better planes to engineering vehicles. In light of the fact that Yubari agreed to play this mod, I think a little understanding that the Allies may resort to some different tactics just to stay afloat is needed. One thing the game does model is that fatigue and morale on long range night bombing raids climbs very fast which is accurate. As I pointed out before these are not long range raids. For B-17's these are short hops.

As to Bomber Command's tactics, I think you need to look at the political and psychologic factors that went into the campaign. The RAF (Bomber Harris) wanted revenge for The Blitz. He wanted to give it out the way the British people had taken it. When you read about the fire storms at places like Hamburg, you cannot deny that the mission of the RAF heavies was not really all that tactical.

As to why Mac didn't shut down Rabaul in 1942? He only had a few dozen B-17/24 at his disposal. THe USAAF didn't really start deploying the heavies to the PTO in numbers until 1943.

[Walloc]

Hi Witpqs,

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I never thought you were trying to push house rules on others, sorry if I gave that impression.

Good i was fearing i was and it wasnt my intension.

Much of what you say is true, but not in the absolute degree in which you assert it. For example, night bombing was done. Saying that a player who chooses to night bomb is using an unhistorical decision process is not accurate. IRL night bombing was not done for fun, it was done because bombing during the day was deemed impossible/impractical/wasn't working, so the player is using exactly the same decision making process.

Let me rephrase then. The thot process regarding tactical bombings wasnt as such. If u couldnt hit it at day, u instead hit it at night.
Not bombing in general and obviously not strategical bombing. Again if some one can point to any historical presedence of sustained night bombing campaigns vs airfields with the purpose of killing of planes having any succes or other tactical targets. I'd agree, else i stick to my point.

The effectiveness of night bombing in the game versus IRL is certainly a valid question. Flowing from there, how should it be used in the game?

Agreed, ofc my POV steems from the issue that in my experience u can hit both planes and ships with succes enough to turn it into a valid tactical use.

In my PBM we have some lengthy experience with night bombing, and the results are not in line with what you seem to be thinking. As I recall it we are seeing a great deal of variability, with effective raids being less usual. Also in contrast to what you have seen, counter-measures do have a meaningful impact on the effects of the raids. Even day-fighters help to reduce the damage from raids over the long term. Definitely damage from night raids is far less than from day raids, even when the night raids are unopposed.

My experince comes from a game, where my very experienced opponent found it less than fun to tangle with the Buzzsaw in massed numbers. So instead turned to a nightbombing campaign vs Calcutta harbor and AF. I certainly agree that the results was less than day bombing im not arguing that. Im saying that night bombing have to great effects on devices Ships/planes. That can be "abused" by night bombing attacks/campaigns.

In one attack yes this wasnt the norm but goes to show what is possible. 18 betties mananged to hit 6 out 7 ships in the harbor some with multiple hits. This was vs every AA gun unit in the indian/burma theather less those on Ceylon in march/april 42. Plus those that had made it out of Malaya. Too boot was there a dedicated night figther unit on watch. The Blenheim IF tho ofc not the best night figther in the world.
This was absolutly the top of curve. On average 1-2-3 hits on 7ish ship was hit on more "normal" attacks. Thats still enough to sink mechies over time. I was also losing more planes on the ground than he was doing the bombing on average. No overstacking and only F at the base after a few attacks.
Did it have any effect, sure he after losing a few betties, swicthed over to IJAAF bombers cuz of their pilots are worth less but it didnt change the results of the bombing. Not cuz teh bombing wasnt paying off. Just smart pilot management.

IMO a ban on night bombing would detract from the game. Short of a ban, what house rules on night bombing would you support?

Well ofc i wanted the modifer for device hits to be reviewed, but i dont think its gona happen.
The odd thing if u for example look at Yubari's example in above post after the overstacking. If one looks at number of hits vs the AF 20 it cause 3 kills. Funny thing is that in my experience 20 day hits wont cause 3 killz in general.
This is the exact same as in my experince. If u look at actual hits vs AF at night vs the at day hits vs AF it arent off. U hit lot less in the night as expected.
Its the device hits that are way off, for some reason it seems u get alot more for ur buck in the night bombings.

So i dont have a problem with the actual bombing of the AF since the hits are so low that its within reason, it doesnt alter the game in any significant way.
Its the device killz that make it so "attractive" and IMHO those that are way off. Hitting an aircraft at a night bombing of an AF is matter of pure luck. Espcially since most of the bombs wouldnt hit the AF at all and those that did was per say targetted.
Its any JFB wet dream if they think about it, to starting to do night campaigns vs 4E based AFs, IMHO.

As too ur question Witpqs. Well until, but i dont think it will be. The device ratio of hits at night is changed i would support a ban. No solutions i see really tackles the issue.
Since u ask for alternatives. I guess it could be only attack an AF every so or so days. Or counting the device hits and saying ok u cant bomb now for X days or what ever. A very tedious solution admited.
Problem as said it the "attactiveness" of these attacks lay in the device hits given for night bombings not the damage done to the actual AF/port.
Its that IMHO that, that needs to be "regulated".
Again giving free advice of the day to JFB, night bomb those 4E bases if u want some free 4E killz and stop crying about not being able to kill them.
Its this sorta viable strategy that makes me support a ban Witpqs. The ability too specificly targeting planes on the ground for night bombing attacks. It was in RL never remotely a viable strategy. It was never in seriousness attempted as it wasnt possible. Saying that night bombings occured while ofc true hasnt nothing IMHO to do with the possible tactic that AE has open up for in this case.
i stress as this thread ably shows, that this isnt a AFB vs JFB issue as it is shown, it goes both ways.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

[anarchyintheuk]

ORIGINAL: Walloc

Let me rephrase then. The thot process regarding tactical bombings wasnt as such. If u couldnt hit it at day, u instead hit it at night.
Not bombing in general and obviously not strategical bombing. Again if some one can point to any historical presedence of sustained night bombing campaigns vs airfields with the purpose of killing of planes having any succes or other tactical targets. I'd agree, else i stick to my point.

My $.02.

Given the specific set of circumstances I have no problem w/ the night bombing. As said above, effectiveness is the issue. If you're the HI air force commander, the enemy has one base w/i tactical range of PH, you have excellent intelligence about the base (it is on your island and maps), some of your pilots have probably flown off of that base, you don't have air superiority, the enemy has a lot of day fighters, your fighters have been shown to be inferior to the enemy's . . . what would you do? I can almost picture a staff guy saying: "Hey, I got an idea."

Looking for precedence is useful, unless it is a novel situation like the one above. In the strategic bombing campaigns in the eto and pto the areas attacked had literally dozens of airfields w/i range of bomber interception. So many so that it was pointless to attempt to suppress them all to be of any tactical value. Eventually, allied air superiority made suppression irrrelevant.

[SuluSea]

Interesting AAR Yubari, keep up the good work!

From Micheal M this spring

Night bombing takes accuracy hits from plane damage, weather/clouds, pilot skill, group morale, flight disruption, non-city attack.
There is an increase in accuracy if target has a high Max DL.

The later is most likely the culprit for any excess in night bombing as we know that the max DL seems to be a runaway figure; the max DL check against the random 10 will always be true in these cases.

The allies conducted small night operations in mid '42 Lae, Rangoon and even Rebaul were targets if they could have been pulled off it's easy to concieve bombers could conduct night operations  4/5 hexes away in their own backyard. This is just one persons opinion, I haven't bombed too much at night but if someone comes into my back yard it's all hands on deck and it should be expected.

[Walloc]

Hi Anarchy I agree so far in the effectivness, but not in that this is a novel situasion.

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

Given the specific set of circumstances I have no problem w/ the night bombing. As said above, effectiveness is the issue. If you're the HI air force commander, the enemy has one base w/i tactical range of PH, you have excellent intelligence about the base (it is on your island and maps), some of your pilots have probably flown off of that base, you don't have air superiority, the enemy has a lot of day fighters, your fighters have been shown to be inferior to the enemy's . . . what would you do? I can almost picture a staff guy saying: "Hey, I got an idea."

About intelligence the added AF level is most likely a new base. The 9 AF PH in it self is 4 bases. What if allies take over a base that japs has used. Is it then allowed for jap to night bomb that cuz they knew the base?
I think ppl fail to get that to find a AF at night is a needle in a hay stack. Then targetting the planes / randomly hitting them is another needle in that needle that is in the hay stack. Problem is that it isnt currently in game so. Any "special" situasion still gets unhistoricly based results. I dont think Yubari is bombing cuz he thinks he can supprese the base. Only reason for doing it as i read him is to get some nice planes killed. That is IMHO using the overeffectivness gamingly. Whether or not this is a "special" situasion. That is not to whack at Yubari. Going out of on a limb here. IMO thats the only reason ppl use night attack, the device killz. If ppl agree device are indeed off the entire reasoning for doing night attack is then by the nature of it gamey. I do some thing i know is off, but i do it any how cuz it pays off.

Looking for precedence is useful, unless it is a novel situation like the one above. In the strategic bombing campaigns in the eto and pto the areas attacked had literally dozens of airfields w/i range of bomber interception. So many so that it was pointless to attempt to suppress them all to be of any tactical value. Eventually, allied air superiority made suppression irrrelevant.

Actually its not an uncommon situasion IMHO. Rheine AF is a perfect example. In late 44 it was the main base and one of only 8 AF in germany that has long enough runways to field Me-262 and only one in that area. Allied knew this perfectly well. They wanted that base dead BADLY. Even came up with novel figther tactics(rat tactics) and counter jet incursion tactics. Used against that particular base only.
It was only 10 mins flight time/50 miles from allied lines, they had intelligence on it. It was reconed several time a day when weather allowed it.
It was bombed several times to absolutly no avail. Certainly didnt stop the jets from using it or having the jets destroyed on the ground. It the end it was forbidden to enter the airzone near the AF cuz of flak concentration and losses that followed. If any1 would have thot a 1000 plane night raid would have work, im sure they would have tried.

Any how ill stop figthing the proverbial windmills, and let Yubari have his AAR back,

Rasmus