Bombers

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
LargeSlowTarget
Posts: 5051
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hessen, Germany - now living in France

RE: Bombers

Post by LargeSlowTarget »

I'm less concerned about base hits, it's the force ratio and the lopsided losses that drive me mad...
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Bombers

Post by Lowpe »

Petes on sweep, 10 percent, at 10K.
User avatar
LargeSlowTarget
Posts: 5051
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hessen, Germany - now living in France

RE: Bombers

Post by LargeSlowTarget »

Countering nonsense with nonsense, so to say. Yes, that will surely put an end to losing Nicks - while still spoiling bomber aim to a degree. But it just doesn't "feel" right...
User avatar
BillBrown
Posts: 2335
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 3:55 am

RE: Bombers

Post by BillBrown »

Maybe if you put green pilots in they will not close with the bombers but will disrupt them? If they
don't close they might not get shot down.
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Bombers

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

In my PBEM we adopted a 50 plane (approximately) per target for night bombing.
and this really restricts damage to minimal inconvenient.

But what you are not seeing is that these bombing missions are also incurring losses to the Allies, you lose a few Nicks, so what, you can build 60 per month if you wish, any bomber lost is far more difficult to replace. And for each bombing night, under normal circumstances, I risk loosing anywhere between 1 to 3 bombers. This to AA, lucky interception or simple operational losses. Keeping this attrition really helps you
User avatar
LargeSlowTarget
Posts: 5051
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hessen, Germany - now living in France

RE: Bombers

Post by LargeSlowTarget »

Ed aka IdahoNYer and I have a (tentative, open to discussion) night-bombing house rule as well, 1 air unit per target in 1941/42, 2 in 43, 4 in 44 and no limits in 45 - IIRC. I have practically given up on night-bombing by myself - only losses to show for negligible to non-existent results. Of course, the Allied night-bombers obtain hits and destroy planes on the ground mot of the time, even in 0% moonlight and apparently with impunity - CAP, flak, radar notwithstanding. His Wellingtons in particular are a PITA - must be the bombload of 8xforgotwhatbombsize. Ed may chime in to correct me on the house rules and maybe also to comment on his bomber osp losses. I do not see where such ops losses - if any - could come from, given that his bombers are rarely damaged.
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: Bombers

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: JocMeister
ORIGINAL: obvert
As Jocke says. This will help gameplay and I've used the same in several games to good effect. I even do this when playing H to H or against the AI from my side as it just makes more sense.

The last one is usually 31k for 44 and then it's kind of fine to let the doors open for 45 to any altitude, as this does help the Allies stay positive against most better Japanese models that have been pushed forward (and produced heavily). The P-47, P-51 and later Corsairs have higher ceilings than the Ki-84 and many other late war planes. If the Japanese end up with K-83, J7W and Ki-94 too early the Allies are screwed anyway. [:)]

Erik! [&o]

Glad to see you are still around at least sporadically. Any chance of a full blown comeback? [:)]

Work is more intense this year, so I'll only be in sporadically. Just on a week's break now so dipping in. Also playing H to H a bit in small scenarios. Still can't kick the habit. [:)]

I miss the community and checking in to things. Alas, so much happening it's hard to get caught up, which is great. Glad to see the same old avatars and even some resurrected games I thought were done.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Bombers

Post by JocMeister »

Sadly a lot of the regulars have disappeared lately. [:(]

Was reading our old AARs over Christmas as I do every year. There is a lot of names in those that arn´t around any longer...
Image
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: Bombers

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Sadly a lot of the regulars have disappeared lately. [:(]

Was reading our old AARs over Christmas as I do every year. There is a lot of names in those that arn´t around any longer...

Time changes things. Good to see a few around though.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
User avatar
FeurerKrieg
Posts: 3400
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:43 pm
Location: Denver, CO

RE: Bombers

Post by FeurerKrieg »

Thankfully I see some new players here and there too.
Image
Upper portion used with permission of www.subart.net, copyright John Meeks
User avatar
John B.
Posts: 3985
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:45 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

RE: Bombers

Post by John B. »

LST, Scott and I have a house rule that allows any 2E bomber to go in when the moon is at 50% or more and any plane with radar (which includes the upgraded wellingtons) to go at any time. 4E bombers can only do city bombing or mining at night. My allied experience has been I shoot down a Nick now and then, he, less frequently shoots down a 2E, and I kill a plane on the ground 10% of the time. I can't say I notice any upsurge in attrition losses and I only use the non radar planes all at once or not at all as the most effective night bombing seems to happen when the Nicks finally run out of ops points and there is no interference. But, I keep at it since it seems like it burns a little bit of his supply and does a little bit of damage that I would not other wise do.

We tried the 4Es and they were blowing the Nicks out of the sky in unprecendeted numbers, I suspect because of the gun fire values and that's when we agreed to limit them to strat bombing at night.
John Barr
User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: Bombers

Post by crsutton »

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

I don't think India is self sufficient; I still send quite a lot of supply convoys from CT to Bombay

Yes, if there is heavy fighting in India then you will need to send supply from CT. In fact Viberpol has invaded and we have been fighting for a year head to toe. I have had to ship constant supply from CT with some coming from the US. Especially after losing Calcutta and the surrounding industrial cities.. However, if India is not a main theater then it should be fairly self sufficient. You only need to ship oil from Abadan.
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: Bombers

Post by crsutton »

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Sadly a lot of the regulars have disappeared lately. [:(]

Was reading our old AARs over Christmas as I do every year. There is a lot of names in those that arn´t around any longer...

Time changes things. Good to see a few around though.


Some are popping back up. I see Miller has posted a few and Canoerebel (Dan) just could not stay away and is back in moderation. Good to see them.
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
User avatar
IdahoNYer
Posts: 2744
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 2:07 am
Location: NYer living in Boise, ID

RE: Bombers

Post by IdahoNYer »

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Ed aka IdahoNYer and I have a (tentative, open to discussion) night-bombing house rule as well, 1 air unit per target in 1941/42, 2 in 43, 4 in 44 and no limits in 45 - IIRC. I have practically given up on night-bombing by myself - only losses to show for negligible to non-existent results. Of course, the Allied night-bombers obtain hits and destroy planes on the ground mot of the time, even in 0% moonlight and apparently with impunity - CAP, flak, radar notwithstanding. His Wellingtons in particular are a PITA - must be the bombload of 8xforgotwhatbombsize. Ed may chime in to correct me on the house rules and maybe also to comment on his bomber osp losses. I do not see where such ops losses - if any - could come from, given that his bombers are rarely damaged.


Right on the money with the house rules. I think it works fairly well. Early on, night bombing is the only way to get bombers on target as the Allies, but limiting the number of squadrons per target keeps it a bit more realistic. With minimal squadrons involved, the results are usually minimal - one or two hits, sometimes lucky rolls bring in some more. Packed AFs or ports will generate a bit more. Allied bombers pack a good bomb load, and changing altitude of the bombers helps reducing bomber losses to fighters. And yes, each raid some planes come back damaged, and a few are lost every once in a while to fighters or flak. Those that are damaged take a long while to repair if 4E.


The best part about night bombing to me isn't the effects on target, but it kinda forces the defender to spread assets to cover both day and night - especially in Burma where numerous bases are viable targets.

User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: Bombers

Post by obvert »

These are the HRs from my most recent game with GreyJoy. We both thought them to work pretty well into 43 when the game was suspended.

Notice the 4E rule on ground bombing. Some of this was hard for the Allies, and I'd use something more similar to the night rule if doing it again. The Allies did use 4Es to bomb at night, and against ground troops, even in 42, but just not in the kind of large numbers possible in game.

We'd chosen 32k for the final years, which I'd forgotten. We didn't get there to see if that limited the craziness of the dive, but I think it slightly favors the IJ as opposed to a rule allowing unlimited ceiling in 45.

Some of this was to balance out the PDU-off.

[font="Trebuchet MS"]The HRs are as follows:
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Strat bombing:

manpower strikes allowed during daylight
manpower strikes allowed during night with sliding scale:

25 planes/target in 41
50 planes/target in 42
100 planes/target in 43
200 planes/target in 44
400 planes/target in 45-46.

CV strikes allowed for any strategic target at any time

Night bombing port/airfield:

50 planes/target for the entire war.

Aerial mining:

50 planes/target only at night for the entire war.

Altitude of CAP/sweep:

15k in 41
20k in 42
25k in 43
32k in 44-46.

Ground bombing:

No 4E ground bombing

Settings:

DBB scen 30 (with Symon's air mods), PDU OFF, Realistic RnD OFF, Replacements OFF, expand OFF, 7th Dec Surprise ON, Historical Start OFF, Auto Subs OFF, Advanced Weather ON [/font]
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20687
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Bombers

Post by BBfanboy »

I would never agree to NO 4-engine aircraft doing ground bombing, given that it was used to create the breakout from the bocage country in Normandy in 1944.

An altitude restriction of 10K would be appropriate. I think that AA has also gotten more effective since the time that you (Obvert) and Greyjoy started your match, so that should help reduce the effectiveness of ground bombing. As it is, carpet-bombing jungle with 4-E bombers only results in a few ringing ears ...
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Bombers

Post by Lowpe »

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
As it is, carpet-bombing jungle with 4-E bombers only results in a few ringing ears ...

No, it can be very hard on the troops, especially below 10K. Even at 10K,if that avoids all the flak,it is nasty.






User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: Bombers

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

I would never agree to NO 4-engine aircraft doing ground bombing, given that it was used to create the breakout from the bocage country in Normandy in 1944.

An altitude restriction of 10K would be appropriate. I think that AA has also gotten more effective since the time that you (Obvert) and Greyjoy started your match, so that should help reduce the effectiveness of ground bombing. As it is, carpet-bombing jungle with 4-E bombers only results in a few ringing ears ...

Ahh, yes, but the game doesn't simulate the also historical friendly fire that wiped out a lot of unfortunate Allied troops as well.

AA was plenty tough in our match using DBB. using early 2Es I couldn't touch the Japanese stacks in India without horrendous losses.

The Allies did use 4Es occasionally against troops. After I started this I read a book about B-17s in the Pacific. Fortress Against the Sun. They hit troops around Buna several times as well as some other missions. They never got more than about 15-20 planes together for each mission though. So in game you can do a lot more than they were able or willing to put together, and the ability of the Allied player to move limitless supplies (including the abstraction of spare parts and upgrades for 4Es) gives us a lot more possibility to slam ground troops. Especially in the open.

Either way, I'm happy to use B-25s for hitting troops and keep the big boys for closing airfields and striking ports, hitting industry and such. It did help keep my pools up! [;)]
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: Bombers

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe
ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
As it is, carpet-bombing jungle with 4-E bombers only results in a few ringing ears ...

No, it can be very hard on the troops, especially below 10K. Even at 10K,if that avoids all the flak,it is nasty.


Yes. Even if you don't knock troops out, the resulting disruption can change a lot of outcomes.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”