Allied Commander Opinion ; Shore bombardment

[Macclan5]

Gents

Has there been 'historical threads' / debates / analysis on shore bombardment ?

Pacific Atols up to and including Marianas

I understand range / settings / all that.

Specifically

1) 1 "big" squadron - multiple BB / CA / CL supported by some destroyers

vs

2) Series of squadrons - for example - 1 BB / 2 X CA / 2 X CL supported by some destroyers - then a series of hits

I guess half the question / answer lies in Squadron size / penalties / Commander stats but which is more commonly practiced ?

Historical answer would seem to suggest "big" squadron but that too is a bit subjective analysis. Historical being Leyte / Saipan as examples

[RangerJoe]

Larger task forces might yield more damage but the constant and numerous bombardments would yield more fatigue and disruption which can reduce the enemy more so than the damage from one large bombardment.

"Here we go again, same ol' shit again!" is a nice tune if you are not on the receiving end.

[HansBolter]

Don't overlook the value of pure DD TF bombardments.

I have gotten some truly nuclear bombardments out of pure DDs.

I like to use them either on the same turn as the big boys so I hit the same target multiple times in a given turn, or on the off turns between runs by the big boys if I don't have the assets or am not close enough to make daily runs with the big boys.

[Barb]

My personal opinion is to use for

Hit and Run bombardments:
Faster ships in bombardment task forces (with similar performance) - in case they meet enemy SAG, it is better and can retreat faster and further - e.g. Kongo class with DesDiv or CAs with DesDiv or CLs with DesDiv (as allies I use Cruiser Division plus Des Division)
- Do not mix slow and ships with different main gun performance - slow ships slow the whole TF and are fire magnets, if you have 16inchers and 6inchers the game may decide the optimal range of engagement to be for the 6inchers

Sustained Bombardments:
You have a base nearby so you can be back at your base even with slow ships and you control the surrounding seas reasonably not to be surprised by enemy SAG - use old battlewagons (4x Ise/Hyuga, slow US battleships, etc) with DesDiv for protection. I would also rather use 3 TFs each of 2-3 BBs and 8-9DDs than one huge 8BB+17DDs. Also helps you to keep the task forces rotating.

Amphibious assault:
Historically there was a pre-war doctrine that said that for each assaulting battalion one needs a DD for direct support, CL for regiment, CA for Division (thus a typical assault with 1 division 2 regiments and 2 battalions each - rest in reserve IRL would have 4DDs, 2 CLs and 1 CA) in direct support. Later war developments showed this to be totally inadequate so was actually upped.
This ships in game should be embedded in the Amphib TF.
Also some reserve ships could be kept at hand to replace those that shoot out their ammo.

[BBfanboy]

I am not certain, but my strong impression is that multiple TFs is better because the first one with spotting raises the D/L. I always have each TF with aircraft fly recon/spotting during the bombardment. I think all the aircraft that can do the mission, but the bombardment CR only shows the spotter aircraft.
The night spotting/recon raises the D/L for subsequent daytime bombardment or bombing.

[Canoerebel]

My experience is that the first bombardment TF always outperforms those that follow later (with the possible exception if the first is small and the later one is very powerful). But there is a caveat: as noted above, successive bombardments seem to have a multiplier effect on disruption and disablements of the land units.

Hans is right. Sometimes pure DD bombardments will far outperform those by heavy capital ships. Why? I don't know. But it happens frequently.

[jdsrae]

For my last go at the Marianas then Iwo Jima I started big but quickly broke the BBs into “Task Group” sized task forces based on their admin Divisions, so typically 3 x BB each.
That gave me 4-5 BB TG so every day there was at least one bombarding while the others were cycling back to replen from AO/AE/AKE or coming back into position.
No evidence to back it up, but I figured the multiple TG approach would be the best way to keep disablements and disruption up, morale of the defenders down.

[Ian R]

On an atoll invasion I have the Bombardment groups (and everything else bar the fast carriers) follow the AGC command group to a hex adjacent to target.

I use a pure BB group, or two, (with ASW protection), and a pure cruiser group for bombardment; DDs see below.

The minesweepers go in early. Sometimes they get shot up by something ashore.

While they are at work I try and grab an undefended dot anchorage within a day's cruise*, and install a CVE TF for cap, offload a naval base unit with some nav support/construction engineers, and park a large group of AO/AE/AKE/CVEs with VR groups there. The more the better. You want a couple of those big AEs as allied, to provide 14/16" ammo to the BBs. As soon as it reaches port size '1' the AE's etc can slowly reload the supplies you are dumping from an (amph loaded) supply TF there, and turn it into BB ammo.

[*you can grab something like Majuro, with a developed port, but you have to fight for it, and it has nasty CD weapons; it is easier to start with a dot and shift your floating base later.)

I then rebase the bombardment guys to the dotbase, and set them to retire, so they will head back there to reload and I can use them in relays to pummel the target. Even the fast carrier TFs can replenish there.

DDs - generally I will try and put a group of DDs, with maybe a couple of Brooklyn CLs, at my forward base, but that really is overkill because TF58 will have cleared away any IJN SAGs already. Those DDs make, as Hans says, useful bombardment runs on days when the big boys are still replenishing.

After a few days of this the assault force moves in from the adjacent hex, I dump a whole Marine division on the atoll with two good unload phases and it usually takes the base and wipes out the dazed defenders on the first attack.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

My experience is that the first bombardment TF always outperforms those that follow later (with the possible exception if the first is small and the later one is very powerful). But there is a caveat: as noted above, successive bombardments seem to have a multiplier effect on disruption and disablements of the land units.

Hans is right. Sometimes pure DD bombardments will far outperform those by heavy capital ships. Why? I don't know. But it happens frequently.

DDs close in to a closer range - 6,000 yards is the maximum that they will end their bombardment at and usually they close to 4,000 yards. I have seen as close as 1,000 yards but that is pretty rare.

As Alfred explained, if you set your big ship bombardment TF to "Escorts Bombard", the big ships will close to 6000 yards during their bombardment instead of the standard 15,000 yards. There is a greater danger from mines or counter-fire from short though.

As for numbers of big ships bombarding, I have found that if the TF has more than 3 BBs it is common for some of the BBs not to use more than a point or two of their ammo supply. With CAs and CLs, I find up to 5 of these ships will bombard but if I have more in the TF some do next to no bombardment. I speculate that there are some randoms but maybe the rate of fire of the bigger ships eats up operations points during the phase so a BB with a ROF of about one per 30 seconds takes longer to finish it's turn at bombardment than a CA or CL would (ROF once every 10 seconds or so).

[durnedwolf]

Using my FP as Recon during Bombardment seems to make a big difference in the damage my bog boys cause. Note that the FP need to be set to Night Ops for night-time bombardments.

[Gridley380]

On a related note, I was trying to think of a time when US BB's conducted shore bombardment *other* than as part of an amphibious assult; granted some of the pre-landing bombardments were quite extensive.

The IJN, of course, did a number of runs of the Tokyo Express including one or more of the Kongo's, and I think did some other stuff as well.

[John B.]

Here are some at the end of the war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_na ... rld_War_II

[Gridley380]

ORIGINAL: John B.

Here are some at the end of the war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_na ... rld_War_II

Ah yes, thank you.

[RangerJoe]

Thank you.