Midway

[Drambuie]

Interesting, personally I'm on the side of 'don't really care the game isn't designed to replicate these intricacies just accept it' but interesting nonetheless.

One thing I'd consider with the focus on the idea of Midway as a fourth carrier is - was this Nimitz's opinion based on pre-war thinking of the usefulness of LBA, the obsession that bombers were more accurate than they proved to be in many real situations etc, or on actual evidence of their contribution to similar scenarios up to that point? Did this doctrinal thinking about bases also impact on the Japanese plans?

As previously mentioned to me Midway's contribution seems limited and about as rubbish as the game would probably simulate [;)]

[US87891]

ORIGINAL: Drambuie
As previously mentioned to me Midway's contribution seems limited and about as rubbish as the game would probably simulate [;)]

Quite. My friends and I have played several six day Midway scenarios as a training exercise before entering into some of the more complex Babes based CRX scenarios. I find that the scenario is well thought out, and the results are reasonable. Several different factors come into play but, in general, the results are what one might expect from a randomization of the 'luck' factor.

Matt

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Drambuie

Interesting, personally I'm on the side of 'don't really care the game isn't designed to replicate these intricacies just accept it' but interesting nonetheless.

One thing I'd consider with the focus on the idea of Midway as a fourth carrier is - was this Nimitz's opinion based on pre-war thinking of the usefulness of LBA, the obsession that bombers were more accurate than they proved to be in many real situations etc, or on actual evidence of their contribution to similar scenarios up to that point? Did this doctrinal thinking about bases also impact on the Japanese plans?

As previously mentioned to me Midway's contribution seems limited and about as rubbish as the game would probably simulate [;)]

Can someone respond to this question? I only have only electronic access to possible sources until next week.

[Feinder]

Dr. Erwin,

I guess the question for you is, do you really want ~MIDWAY~ (specificially, with all the bells and whistles and accuracy). Or do you really just want a sand box to test stuff with?

Yes, I actually did do a Midway Scenario for the original WitP. Frankly, it was a LOT of work, and a royal pain-the-arse. Essentially, it's (almost) everything in the Japanese OB available in June 1942, vs. 3x US CVs, some cruisers, and some destroyers.

~CAN~ a Midway scenario be done for WitP-AE? Sure. But frankly, I for one, don't have the time do actually create the thing. It's gi-normous (esp if you include the Aleutions operations, which you certainly SHOULD).

But if all you really want is sandbox to test "what happens if I put 4x IJN CVs vs. 3x US CVs" near an island with handful of LBA; pull the cord and see what happens... That's not hard.

-F-

[Alfred]

Feinder,

Nice to see you gingerly making your way back to the forum. Does that also mean we are going to see the reinstitution of your brother's famous, "The game is borked, this could never happen in real life" threads?

Alfred

[LoBaron]

Nothing speaks against a Midway scenario.

One has to be aware of the following though:
It will never lead to the Battle of Midway.

There were many things that went wrong for Japan before the battle even started.

This cannot be simulated, because it concerns signal intercepts, knowledge delta of enemy forces,
doctrines and maybe most important a compromise decision borne from divided interests from those
in command.

To provoke such a situation with a similar outcome you have to play PBEM, outguess the opponent,
and at the same time provoke him into making a move you think is advantious to you.
Because exactly the same happened at Midway.

Recreating the scenario and counting points does in no way simulate the setup of the battle because
the most crucial puzzle parts cannot be replicated.


Stop dreaming about a true historical recreation, because simple hindsight makes this impossible.

Herwin this would also be my answer to your first post.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Dr. Erwin,

I guess the question for you is, do you really want ~MIDWAY~ (specificially, with all the bells and whistles and accuracy). Or do you really just want a sand box to test stuff with?

Yes, I actually did do a Midway Scenario for the original WitP. Frankly, it was a LOT of work, and a royal pain-the-arse. Essentially, it's (almost) everything in the Japanese OB available in June 1942, vs. 3x US CVs, some cruisers, and some destroyers.

~CAN~ a Midway scenario be done for WitP-AE? Sure. But frankly, I for one, don't have the time do actually create the thing. It's gi-normous (esp if you include the Aleutions operations, which you certainly SHOULD).

But if all you really want is sandbox to test "what happens if I put 4x IJN CVs vs. 3x US CVs" near an island with handful of LBA; pull the cord and see what happens... That's not hard.

-F-

I'd like a sandbox, but I suspect a lot of other people would like a scenario or three.

[spence]

A campaign game or broad scale scenario that starts around May of 1942 and encompasses all of the Japanese strategic possibilities is probably the most eagerly desired new scenario by many players.

[toonces]

I'm not sure, even reading Dr. Erwin's post, what exactly HE is looking for.

However, the idea of a- say 1 week- campaign centered around the Midway operation sounds interesting to me.

I caveat that by saying that if you are looking for "The Battle of Midway", then as posted above, I don't think WiTP:AE is the best simulation for that. As stated, there are too many variables that are hard to simulate at WiTP's scale to get an accurate Midway result...this is wargame simulation 101 and I don't need to belabor it.

It could be an interesting exercise if you make the scenario start far enough out that there is maneuvering room for both sides, with Japanese victory conditions tied in some way to force them to go for Midway and open themselves up to counterattack by US forces, it could be "fun" if not exactly historically correct.

If the goal of this thread is to test mathematical models, then I agree, what's the point? Scale is everything. I'm sure Dr. Erwin, and any other student of wargaming understands this limitation.

I don't frequent these boards much, so I may have missed a lot of the background. The idea is something I've toyed with before though, hence my interest.

[Knavey]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Feinder,

Nice to see you gingerly making your way back to the forum. Does that also mean we are going to see the reinstitution of your brother's famous, "The game is borked, this could never happen in real life" threads?

Alfred

Shhh! [;)]

[darbycmcd]

Harry, I think you are sort of looking at this the wrong way. Would the game exactly recreate the EVENTS of Midway, no. Would it create the OUTCOME of Midway, given an operationally accurate setup I would expect it would.

What you would have is two carrier forces, undetected, approaching Midway. The Japanese air would be set to 'naval' with secondary 'airbase'. Your first assumption, that Midway would not detect the Japanese, is wrong from my experience. Even relatively poorly trained B17 pilots would detect KB I believe, at least by being shot at! They are set to 'naval attack' with a search 30 in the approach arc. Now it is just a matter if Japanese search (only float planes from CA) would detect the American TF in the AM phase. maybe yes, maybe no. But it is not at all a given they would. Lets assume no, off goes the Japanese strike to Midway, runs into some CAP, a bit of AA turbulence, back home a bit worse for wear, some planes damaged, some shot down. Now Midway launches some strikes at KB, including B17s, just a few. They don't do much but they do wear down CAP quite a bit (which is set low for Japanese by the way). So now come the uncoordinated American carrier attacks. They dribble and drabble in but CAP is worn down already. A couple carriers take a couple hits. Crap, they can't run ops now! So the PM phase happens and the more typical exchange of strikes goes on, the IJN does manage to get off a small strike and because they are generally pretty fair pilots, they put a couple torps into an American carrier which is finished off by a sub on its way home. The USN scrapes up what is left and manages to badly hit the remaining undamaged carrier. It just remains to finish them off the next day.

I would say that is a totally plausible outcome in the game. It is not exactly Midway, but it is close enough. You just seem to be unhappy with the performance of LBA vs carriers, that is why you are so focused on 'Midway equals a carrier'

[Kull]

About the only way to set up a "Midway Simulator" would be to have all the forces in the historical positions on the morning of June 4th, with Japanese carrier air all set to land attack first, with at least half having a secondary attack of airfield or somesuch (to reflect the fact that most were preparing for a second strike on Midway). And only the CAs set to perform the historical Naval Search pattern. Meanwhile the US CVs are all set for Naval attack (and they probably should know where KB is and be invisible themselves). Not sure this would be much fun to play, but that's the only way you're going to mimic the real life result that the Americans were expecting the Japanese CVs, but not the other way around.
 
And as an aside, one of my big takeaways from Shattered Sword was a new-found appreciation of the role played by the land based attackers from Midway. Yes, the 5 different attacks were ineffectual from a "causing damage" perspective, but they kept the Japanese CVs busy with CAP exercises during the crucial early morning period from 7:10 to 7:30 and again from 7:50 to 8:30. It was impossible for the Japanese to service the CAP (by launching new aircraft and retrieving and rearming those in the air) AND bring a new strike package onto the deck (a 45 minute task, at best). By the time the last of the land-based American attacks had finished, the Japanese Midway strike force was back, and it took another 45 minutes to land the aircraft and stow them below. And almost immediately thereafter, at 9:17, the first of the US carrier based attacks had begun (Hornet's ill-fated TBDs), followed right away by the Enterprise torp squadron. Together, these two attacks kept the decks busy servicing CAP until 9:50, and by then it was far too late for anything other than dying. Nagumo should have sent off a 64 plane strike as soon as the American fleet was first spotted at 7:40, but the need to fend off a continuous series of American land-based air attacks kept him (and the carrier decks) otherwise occupied, and thus the only real Japanese opportunity for a significant counterstrike was never really an option.
 
Pull the land based attackers out of this equation, and the Midway results would probably have been different (albeit a catastrophic ending for the Japanese was still the most likely outcome)

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Kull

About the only way to set up a "Midway Simulator" would be to have all the forces in the historical positions on the morning of June 4th, with Japanese carrier air all set to land attack first, with at least half having a secondary attack of airfield or somesuch (to reflect the fact that most were preparing for a second strike on Midway). And only the CAs set to perform the historical Naval Search pattern. Meanwhile the US CVs are all set for Naval attack (and they probably should know where KB is and be invisible themselves). Not sure this would be much fun to play, but that's the only way you're going to mimic the real life result that the Americans were expecting the Japanese CVs, but not the other way around.

And as an aside, one of my big takeaways from Shattered Sword was a new-found appreciation of the role played by the land based attackers from Midway. Yes, the 5 different attacks were ineffectual from a "causing damage" perspective, but they kept the Japanese CVs busy with CAP exercises during the crucial early morning period from 7:10 to 7:30 and again from 7:50 to 8:30. It was impossible for the Japanese to service the CAP (by launching new aircraft and retrieving and rearming those in the air) AND bring a new strike package onto the deck (a 45 minute task, at best). By the time the last of the land-based American attacks had finished, the Japanese Midway strike force was back, and it took another 45 minutes to land the aircraft and stow them below. And almost immediately thereafter, at 9:17, the first of the US carrier based attacks had begun (Hornet's ill-fated TBDs), followed right away by the Enterprise torp squadron. Together, these two attacks kept the decks busy servicing CAP until 9:50, and by then it was far too late for anything other than dying. Nagumo should have sent off a 64 plane strike as soon as the American fleet was first spotted at 7:40, but the need to fend off a continuous series of American land-based air attacks kept him (and the carrier decks) otherwise occupied, and thus the only real Japanese opportunity for a significant counterstrike was never really an option.

Pull the land based attackers out of this equation, and the Midway results would probably have been different (albeit a catastrophic ending for the Japanese was still the most likely outcome)

I suspect that's the real role of Midway Island.

[mdiehl]

I was impressed by the Appendix in Shattered Sword that showed how hopelessly hosed the Japanese landing force was, and how they'd have to wade through waist deep water from the edge of the coral reef through a lagoon to get to shore. It'd have made Pickett's charge and Burnside's bridge seem like reasonable efforts.

I always knew that Midway Island had functioned sort of like a rope-a-dope against the Japanese. It drew their attention and their efforts. Or as Patton had a habit of saying it held them by the nose so they could be kicked in the rear end.

The thing that was really revealing to me about Shattered Sword was how utterly clugey Japanese plane handling and deck ops were. I had long wondered how they could be so good at attacking fixed positions and so horrid at "fluid" battles. Now I know.