Pearl Harbor Killer Flak!

[rev rico]

Oh my! In my new PBEM beta RA 6.6 game, my initial PH strike (with Dec 7 Surprise ON) had this result

Japanese aircraft losses
B5N2 Kate: 61 damaged
B5N2 Kate: 25 destroyed by flak
D3A1 Val: 21 damaged
D3A1 Val: 3 destroyed by flak

OUCH!

[dr.hal]

Was that actual damage or Fog of War damage?

[rev rico]

That was the combat report. It was actually more Kates because the damaged ones didn't all make it back. It was bad. Real bad.
I didn't realize how more effective flak was with beta and RA.

[rev rico]

I should add that I had the Kates coming in at 2000'. That had proven to be the most effective altitude in all my previous games and test runs for the PH attack. I guess I will never do that again! :-0

[Xargun]

Was this the Dec 7th surprise attack or a followup attack ? And was Surprised turned on -- this greatly reduces the flak at PH for turn 1.

[rev rico]

Dec 7 Surprise attack, very first attack
yes, I double checked and surprise was ON

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: rev rico

I should add that I had the Kates coming in at 2000'. That had proven to be the most effective altitude in all my previous games and test runs for the PH attack. I guess I will never do that again! :-0

Therein lies your mistake. At that point, everyone with a handgun or air-rifle will be taking pot shots at you, let alone the 20 and 40mm guns.

[Lokasenna]

Here's mine against database flak updates:

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 11 damaged
A6M2 Zero: 13 destroyed by flak
B5N2 Kate: 6 damaged
B5N2 Kate: 3 destroyed by flak
D3A1 Val: 23 damaged
D3A1 Val: 7 destroyed by flak

It was really rough. Those Zeroes were on airfield attack at 100 feet. Surprise was on, as well as historical first turn. I recommend not doing historical first turn if you are using the database updates (or DBB).

[rev rico]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Therein lies your mistake. At that point, everyone with a handgun or air-rifle will be taking pot shots at you, let alone the 20 and 40mm guns.

I figured, but the Vals dropped to 1000-2000' to drop bombs and didn't suffer badly. It's obviously a new thing with beta and/or RA 6.6

[Yaab]

But the Allied flak in PH on December 7 shoots with the same effectiveness as on any other day. The surprise effect does not seem to affect the AA crews at all - they are at 100% war footing. Go figure.

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: rev rico

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Therein lies your mistake. At that point, everyone with a handgun or air-rifle will be taking pot shots at you, let alone the 20 and 40mm guns.

I figured, but the Vals dropped to 1000-2000' to drop bombs and didn't suffer badly. It's obviously a new thing with beta and/or RA 6.6

Not in the beta, but in the scenario files. The database updates make concentrated flak (such as at PH on December 7) really brutal. Much closer to real life effectiveness, I guess. Losing only about 8 planes, or some cases none, as can happen in stock is simply absurd.

[Gaspote]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: rev rico

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Therein lies your mistake. At that point, everyone with a handgun or air-rifle will be taking pot shots at you, let alone the 20 and 40mm guns.

I figured, but the Vals dropped to 1000-2000' to drop bombs and didn't suffer badly. It's obviously a new thing with beta and/or RA 6.6

Not in the beta, but in the scenario files. The database updates make concentrated flak (such as at PH on December 7) really brutal. Much closer to real life effectiveness, I guess. Losing only about 8 planes, or some cases none, as can happen in stock is simply absurd.

It should be the case for the 7th surprise. It's what japanese lost. In my opinion, for all scenario, all flak should be remove and add the 8th in any place so the japanese can attack freely with historical result.

I mean in most case the allied just retreat even without lose so the jap have the opportunity to hit hard only the 7th and he should be able to do that.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Gaspote

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: rev rico




I figured, but the Vals dropped to 1000-2000' to drop bombs and didn't suffer badly. It's obviously a new thing with beta and/or RA 6.6

Not in the beta, but in the scenario files. The database updates make concentrated flak (such as at PH on December 7) really brutal. Much closer to real life effectiveness, I guess. Losing only about 8 planes, or some cases none, as can happen in stock is simply absurd.

It should be the case for the 7th surprise. It's what japanese lost. In my opinion, for all scenario, all flak should be remove and add the 8th in any place so the japanese can attack freely with historical result.

I mean in most case the allied just retreat even without lose so the jap have the opportunity to hit hard only the 7th and he should be able to do that.

The Allies SHOULD also be able to shoot anything out of the skies in '44 with near impunity, but this isn't the case in the game.

It's a game, not an exact recreation of history.

If it was no one would play Japanese.

This point has been made many, many times on this forum....mostly by those who favor the Japanese side.

[Erkki]

In one of my games I attacked Pearl for 3 days and failed to sink a single ship. As the matter of fact on the turn 1 only half of the B5Ns flew and I couldnt find any reason for it. Out of the 14 group sorties by B5Ns they bothered to carry torpedoes only on 4 IIRC. 2 of the CVs hadnt used a single torp when I had to give up as losses were growing unbearable. After that I've been a big advocate of attacking Manila rather than Pearl: much more consistent results, you get the KB where it matters the most right at the start and you have about 50 crack CV pilots more once the December 7th is done. The subs are just a bonus. Next time I'll probaby combine Manila attack with Mersing landings on the 8th or 9th.

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

The Allies SHOULD also be able to shoot anything out of the skies in '44 with near impunity, but this isn't the case in the game.

It's a game, not an exact recreation of history.

If it was no one would play Japanese.

This point has been made many, many times on this forum....mostly by those who favor the Japanese side.

How would the real war have developed without a Midway exchange in mid 1942 which does not happen in most games? As you said, witpae is no history. Despite the Japanese player having control over production and having probably too much edge early on in China, most Allied players still dont seem to have too much trouble beating Japan in historical schedule. Perhaps not fully in historical fashion but by mid 1945 still. And even out of those games most are scenarios that have improved Japan's strength way or another. I cant recall a single Scen 1 or DBB PBEM AAR that has reached mid 1943, 1944 or longer and where it for sure looks like Japan is going to hold longer than in real life. Maybe your thought of historical Allied air supremacy in 1944 and onwards is not quite how it was in the real show, or perhaps the game has other things favoring the Allies that balance it out.

[Gaspote]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: Gaspote

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna




Not in the beta, but in the scenario files. The database updates make concentrated flak (such as at PH on December 7) really brutal. Much closer to real life effectiveness, I guess. Losing only about 8 planes, or some cases none, as can happen in stock is simply absurd.

It should be the case for the 7th surprise. It's what japanese lost. In my opinion, for all scenario, all flak should be remove and add the 8th in any place so the japanese can attack freely with historical result.

I mean in most case the allied just retreat even without lose so the jap have the opportunity to hit hard only the 7th and he should be able to do that.

The Allies SHOULD also be able to shoot anything out of the skies in '44 with near impunity, but this isn't the case in the game.

It's a game, not an exact recreation of history.

If it was no one would play Japanese.

This point has been made many, many times on this forum....mostly by those who favor the Japanese side.

It's not like if the allies couldn't shot down a single plane in 1944.

The result in PH attack is like, 30 planes and no BB sunk and all repair in mid 1942. There are a huge difference compare to the 180 planes and all BB allmost sunk.

[HansBolter]

Guys, all I was doing was providing a 'counterpoint" example of how the game differs from history.

It's a game which means its intended to have variations of results which also means that sometimes you are going to be on the bad end of the extremes in those results.

Sometimes you roll a one and sometimes you roll a six (that's a boardgame reference for you young tikes not old enough to remember the golden era of board wargaming).

[geofflambert]

ORIGINAL: rev rico

I should add that I had the Kates coming in at 2000'. That had proven to be the most effective altitude in all my previous games and test runs for the PH attack. I guess I will never do that again! :-0

Don't ever do that against a target with lots of flak. TBs at 5,000 and DBs at 10,000 and don't use fighters to attack ground/sea targets. The TBs will drop to the appropriate altitude at the appropriate time to drop the fish. If they're using bombs or shells, the TBs should be at 5k. With torpedoes some players will run them in at 10k or higher. I don't. Now when you're running them in at 5, some escort fighters will come in with them at 7. Having said what I said, the TBs will not always use torpedoes even if you have them available and the squadron screen shows "use torpedoes". I think there's some commander discretion involved to not use up all the torpedo inventory too fast, and it's probably modified by the nature of the target. For instance, at Pearl, since many of the BBs were anchored side by side, only one of each pair could be torpedoed. Many of the Kates used (14" I believe) AP shells with wooden fins attached.

[geofflambert]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Guys, all I was doing was providing a 'counterpoint" example of how the game differs from history.

It's a game which means its intended to have variations of results which also means that sometimes you are going to be on the bad end of the extremes in those results.

Sometimes you roll a one and sometimes you roll a six (that's a boardgame reference for you young tikes not old enough to remember the golden era of board wargaming).

I always roll "snake eyes" to honor my fellow reptiles.

[rev rico]

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

ORIGINAL: rev rico

I should add that I had the Kates coming in at 2000'. That had proven to be the most effective altitude in all my previous games and test runs for the PH attack. I guess I will never do that again! :-0

Don't ever do that against a target with lots of flak. TBs at 5,000 and DBs at 10,000 and don't use fighters to attack ground/sea targets. The TBs will drop to the appropriate altitude at the appropriate time to drop the fish. If they're using bombs or shells, the TBs should be at 5k. With torpedoes some players will run them in at 10k or higher. I don't. Now when you're running them in at 5, some escort fighters will come in with them at 7. Having said what I said, the TBs will not always use torpedoes even if you have them available and the squadron screen shows "use torpedoes". I think there's some commander discretion involved to not use up all the torpedo inventory too fast, and it's probably modified by the nature of the target. For instance, at Pearl, since many of the BBs were anchored side by side, only one of each pair could be torpedoed. Many of the Kates used (14" I believe) AP shells with wooden fins attached.

I won't in any mod scn, but I have been in the stock games and get max results for very few planes lost.

[Numdydar]

ORIGINAL: Erkki

In one of my games I attacked Pearl for 3 days and failed to sink a single ship. As the matter of fact on the turn 1 only half of the B5Ns flew and I couldnt find any reason for it. Out of the 14 group sorties by B5Ns they bothered to carry torpedoes only on 4 IIRC. 2 of the CVs hadnt used a single torp when I had to give up as losses were growing unbearable. After that I've been a big advocate of attacking Manila rather than Pearl: much more consistent results, you get the KB where it matters the most right at the start and you have about 50 crack CV pilots more once the December 7th is done. The subs are just a bonus. Next time I'll probaby combine Manila attack with Mersing landings on the 8th or 9th.

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

The Allies SHOULD also be able to shoot anything out of the skies in '44 with near impunity, but this isn't the case in the game.

It's a game, not an exact recreation of history.

If it was no one would play Japanese.

This point has been made many, many times on this forum....mostly by those who favor the Japanese side.

How would the real war have developed without a Midway exchange in mid 1942 which does not happen in most games? As you said, witpae is no history. Despite the Japanese player having control over production and having probably too much edge early on in China, most Allied players still dont seem to have too much trouble beating Japan in historical schedule. Perhaps not fully in historical fashion but by mid 1945 still. And even out of those games most are scenarios that have improved Japan's strength way or another. I cant recall a single Scen 1 or DBB PBEM AAR that has reached mid 1943, 1944 or longer and where it for sure looks like Japan is going to hold longer than in real life. Maybe your thought of historical Allied air supremacy in 1944 and onwards is not quite how it was in the real show, or perhaps the game has other things favoring the Allies that balance it out.

Not to side track the thread, but the reason the Allies can win in game faster are due to two main reasons, hindsight and no need to write letters home.