Rabaul full with TF´s...i want to attack them

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 6:11 pm

In my current game Rabaul is visited very often by japanese TF´s, mostly AP and TK´s, but now he´s got at least 1 Battlewaggon there and i want to punch it, but how?

I have 90 B17 and nearly 100 P-38 at Gili-Gili, wish i could send them after the TF´s located in Rabaul, but when i set them to naval interdiction they go after some other worthless scrap around

When i choose port attack it seems they go after ships docked in habour, not after the TF´s located there.

Can someone advise me?

Thank you!:D

Mr.Frag · Post by **Mr.Frag** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 7:34 pm

Lilly livered bombers will not attack something that shoots back without some escort. Thats probably whats stopping the attacks from flying ... you are failing the moral/escort check to go after the target that shoots back

Generally the same reason that your land based bombers don't attack CV's, they are afraid of them

Yamamoto · Post by **Yamamoto** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 8:57 pm

He said he had 100 P-38s. How much escort do those B-17s need?

Yamamoto

Erik Rutins · Post by **Erik Rutins** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 9:13 pm

Try assigning the escorts a target of Rabaul and see if that motivates the bomber pilots to follow their fighters in.

Regards,

- Erik

11Bravo · Post by **11Bravo** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 9:14 pm

I have never had a level bomber go after TF at Rabaul, regardless of escort, experience, moral, fatigue, or hitting the monitor.

What does seem to work is torpedo bombers from that hex just above Shortlands (Buna?). They are fearless, eschew escorts, and die bravely in droves. The level bombers pound the port and docked ships, but ignore the TFs.

Also, the Jap AI senses any surface fleets I send into the harbor. Jap TF's back up for a turn, then come back as my fleet departs. Oh, well

at least they can't bombard Gasmata when they're doing that dance.

denisonh · Post by **denisonh** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 9:36 pm

I have Fearless Hudsons out PM fly to Rabaul and get butchered, so it can happen.

I have even had B-26s out of GG hit a carrier TF at Rabaul without escort.

I would guess that the unit set to Naval Attack will strike the easiest target. The path of least resistance.

That would explain why my fighters always choose to escort the mission where there isn't enemy CAP, and the mission the runs into CAP has no fighters (but passed morale because they had escorts available)

Mr.Frag · Post by **Mr.Frag** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 9:45 pm

I have never had a level bomber go after TF at Rabaul, regardless of escort, experience, moral, fatigue, or hitting the monitor.

That is VERY strange. I always have to move the Hudsons out of PM because they ALWAYS fly off and pummel the MSW at Rabaul even with poor experience and poor moral and sky high fatigue committing suicide.

rcwkent · Post by **rcwkent** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 1:46 am

Yes, you have to be careful with those fearless Hudson's.

Out of PM on Naval Attack they seem just to attack TF's at Rabul and Kavieng.

Mr.Frag · Post by **Mr.Frag** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 2:32 am

Bravo, you are aware that this night phase two-step is a valid move right?

Ships set to avoid enemy will step one hex towards their major home port during the night phase (ONLY) and return the following morning when they detect a surface/bombardment TF entering the hex. It is never a sure thing (they may not detect), but you can counter it by being in both places at the same time

They can't avoid both sets.

juliet7bravo · Post by **juliet7bravo** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 3:07 am

It's interesting...I've NEVER, EVER had LBA bombers other than the Hudsons attack TF's at Rabaul. I've had PM full strength with medium/heavy bombers (not over, full support/supply, escorts, and HQ) and still not been able to attack Rabaul TF's.

On one hand, you have the Hudsons invariably making suicidal attacks, on the other...nothing. The usefulness of the Hudsons is negated by their behavior, since you really can't use them for LR naval attack out of PM since they flock to Rabaul to die like lemmings.

Sooooo...why do they attack Rabaul, and nothing else will?

Mr.Frag · Post by **Mr.Frag** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 3:32 am

Can you post the game or is it a PBEM ?

Joel Billings · Post by **Joel Billings** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 3:49 am

Originally posted by juliet7bravo
It's interesting...I've NEVER, EVER had LBA bombers other than the Hudsons attack TF's at Rabaul. I've had PM full strength with medium/heavy bombers (not over, full support/supply, escorts, and HQ) and still not been able to attack Rabaul TF's.

On one hand, you have the Hudsons invariably making suicidal attacks, on the other...nothing. The usefulness of the Hudsons is negated by their behavior, since you really can't use them for LR naval attack out of PM since they flock to Rabaul to die like lemmings.

Sooooo...why do they attack Rabaul, and nothing else will?

In the next patch the US heavies are happy to fly to Rabaul unescorted. Look for it in a week or so. We've fixed some bad logic in the targeting routines.

Fred98 · Post by **Fred98** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 5:17 am

Set your bombers on Port Attack.

Most ships in Rabaul Harbour will sink.

And it seems the new patch will make it EASIER for the bombers.

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 11:03 am

Send a new strike yesterday, with some solid hits on some APD´s in habour, but again, anchored ships and not members of Task Forces.. it seems the Battleship disappeared.

At least i´ve got good air power over Rabaul:D

Yamamoto · Post by **Yamamoto** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 8:49 pm

Originally posted by Joe 98

And it seems the new patch will make it EASIER for the bombers.

God help us if THAT is true.

Yamamoto

Mr.Frag · Post by **Mr.Frag** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 11:01 pm

God help us if THAT is true.

From what Joel said, this will be offset by the added difficulties getting pilots skilled up ... hope so, or we will have no navies after the first two months of gameplay

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Mon Feb 24, 2003 8:16 pm

Nearly all of them are flying to target, but the problem is the targeting routine...a TF docked at the harbour isn´t moving, therefore an easy target even for level bombers.

Problem is the game makes a difference between docked single ships and docked Task Forces...that should be the same.

A ship in harbour is a ship in harbour, Member of a Task Force or not.

Mr.Frag · Post by **Mr.Frag** » Mon Feb 24, 2003 9:48 pm

Any docked ship (whether disbanded OR docked) should be a potential target for airbase attacks AND port attacks AND naval attacks. This hide and seek rule is just plain silly. You are NOT going to hide a BB under some rock so it can't be bombed!

Docked implies restricted movement, you can't dodge the bomb (no torpedoes though - assuming torpedo netting etc although historically special torpedoes were used for this type of attack).

This game of Rock - Paper - Scissors makes absolutely no sense.

No pilot worth his salt is going to NOT attack a capital asset when he happens upon it below him, no matter what his orders may have been. Naval ships were simply too valuable a target to fly over them to do something else instead.

Anyone wants to dig up some history that shows that pilots deliberately ignored dropping their bombs on capital ships that they happened to discover and I'll shut up and go away

HMSWarspite · Post by **HMSWarspite** » Tue Feb 25, 2003 12:28 am

Originally posted by Mr.Frag
Any docked ship (whether disbanded OR docked) should be a potential target for airbase attacks AND port attacks AND naval attacks. This hide and seek rule is just plain silly. You are NOT going to hide a BB under some rock so it can't be bombed!

Docked implies restricted movement, you can't dodge the bomb (no torpedoes though - assuming torpedo netting etc although historically special torpedoes were used for this type of attack).

This game of Rock - Paper - Scissors makes absolutely no sense.

No pilot worth his salt is going to NOT attack a capital asset when he happens upon it below him, no matter what his orders may have been. Naval ships were simply too valuable a target to fly over them to do something else instead.

Anyone wants to dig up some history that shows that pilots deliberately ignored dropping their bombs on capital ships that they happened to discover and I'll shut up and go away

I agree with the port/docked TF/at sea saga, however as a rule, a/c on a land based bombing mission wouldn't attack ships because of the inappropriate bomb load, or at least fusing. I do not know for US B17, but a British anti shipping load (say a French Port) differs beyond all recognition from a city load (500lb SAP or possibly GP, vs all sorts like MC, incendiaries etc).
Generally Bombing missions, especially daylight US formation missions take too much setting up to change much on the fly.Even getting a reasonable formation (say a BG) over a ship that you bumb into unexpectedly would require some work.

11Bravo · Post by **11Bravo** » Tue Feb 25, 2003 1:41 am

Originally posted by Mr.Frag
Bravo, you are aware that this night phase two-step is a valid move right?

Ships set to avoid enemy will step one hex towards their major home port during the night phase (ONLY) and return the following morning when they detect a surface/bombardment TF entering the hex. It is never a sure thing (they may not detect), but you can counter it by being in both places at the same time They can't avoid both sets.

I did not know that. Thanks.

Rabaul full with TF´s...i want to attack them

Rabaul full with TF´s...i want to attack them

Response...

..

The problem isn´t they didn´t want to fly...but