House rule 4Es

[Gratch1111]

So have played some games now and have had a house rule of 4Es not bombing below 10000, which makes sense. However I have also noticed some only have that rule for naval bombing and not for ground targets. Which house rule is the more common based on your experience?

10000 for all missions or 10000 only for Naval attack?

[WEXF]

IMO the reason for the 10000 foot rule is mainly to prevent "skip bombing' by 4E bombers against shipping. That being the case there is no real reason to have it against land targets.

[RangerJoe]

Also, most people would allow the Naval version of the 4Es to bomb at a lower level. They were trained to do so and they actually did that. Some US Army B-17s also did that but not too often.

[WEXF]

In setting up any HR on this you should also clarify with your opponent the status of 4E patrol planes. Usually they are excluded from the HR.

[JanSako]

I am a fan of not using 4E heavies as tactical support, meaning keep the 10k for ground attacks as well. These guys are meant to level cities and not snipe infantry in trenches or marching through jungles... there are other tools for that.

In my 2 current games the Navy trained heavies are allowed to go NAV bomb down to 2k, which is also the minimum level for 2E 'level' bombers against shipping as well. Fighters & F-B's are allowed to go to 100'.

[RangerJoe]

I am a fan of not using 4E heavies as tactical support, meaning keep the 10k for ground attacks as well. These guys are meant to level cities and not snipe infantry in trenches or marching through jungles... there are other tools for that.

In my 2 current games the Navy trained heavies are allowed to go NAV bomb down to 2k, which is also the minimum level for 2E 'level' bombers against shipping as well. Fighters & F-B's are allowed to go to 100'.

For the 2Es, that does not represent the actual use of those bombers - whether or not they were attack versions or not.

The American 4Es were designed as precision bombers and the B-17 early on was seen as a means of defeating an invasion fleet.

The interception of the Rex was a training exercise and military aviation achievement of the United States Army Air Corps prior to World War II. The tracking and location of an ocean-going vessel (the Italian liner SS Rex) by B-17 Flying Fortresses on 12 May 1938 was a major event in the development of a doctrine that led to a United States Air Force independent of the Army.[1] The mission was ostensibly a training exercise for coastal defense of the United States, but was conceived by planners to be a well-publicized demonstration of the capabilities of "heavy bombers (as) long range instruments of power".[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interception_of_the_Rex

[Yaab]

My house rule against Jap AI is to ban all 2Es and 4Es from ground attack in contested hexes. NO GROUND ATTACK EVER IN CONTESTED HEXES BY 2Es AND 4Es. Only F/FB/DB and TB with bombs can fly ground attack (CAS) in contested hexes.

As for naval strike, I try to use small 4Es units at 100 feet. Best are 4E subgroups of 3 aicraft or those HQ squadrons of 3-5 aircarft, flying alone.

[Sardaukar]

Well, using 4E bombers at 100 ft is totally ahistorical until September-October 1942 when skip bombing was invented (by using B-17s, no less).

I never use 4E bombers lower than 1000 ft (they are accurate at that altitude) and same with 2E. Attack bombers drop automatically to 100 ft, so 1000 ft works for them too. Non-attack bombers need to be specifically set to skip bomb at 100 ft, but I consider it bit gamey. Basically after 1942 it was job of attack bombers and they do it "automagicically".

[JanSako]

I am a fan of not using 4E heavies as tactical support, meaning keep the 10k for ground attacks as well. These guys are meant to level cities and not snipe infantry in trenches or marching through jungles... there are other tools for that.

In my 2 current games the Navy trained heavies are allowed to go NAV bomb down to 2k, which is also the minimum level for 2E 'level' bombers against shipping as well. Fighters & F-B's are allowed to go to 100'.

For the 2Es, that does not represent the actual use of those bombers - whether or not they were attack versions or not.

The American 4Es were designed as precision bombers and the B-17 early on was seen as a means of defeating an invasion fleet.

The interception of the Rex was a training exercise and military aviation achievement of the United States Army Air Corps prior to World War II. The tracking and location of an ocean-going vessel (the Italian liner SS Rex) by B-17 Flying Fortresses on 12 May 1938 was a major event in the development of a doctrine that led to a United States Air Force independent of the Army.[1] The mission was ostensibly a training exercise for coastal defense of the United States, but was conceived by planners to be a well-publicized demonstration of the capabilities of "heavy bombers (as) long range instruments of power".[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interception_of_the_Rex

To the article above, NAV search, absolutely. As far as defeating invasions while they are out at the sea... maybe it was a concept, but that does not mean it did/would have work IRL.

In game for 4E's and to lower extent 2E's it's not that the concept is not historical, more that:
a.) it was a way less common use of them than what happens in the game if it is allowed. Hence I am OK with the Navy squadrons doing 100' runs. Same with 'Attack bombers' - Bottlenecks have more of these than stock.
b.) For heavy bombers, it only worked in very specific situations - moored, unloading ships (essentially stationary) or against something with low maneuverability.
c.) Players use them in completely ahistorical scenarios/ways - how many CA's or CV's did 4E's sunk skip-bombing on the open sea IRL? If the game would let you do something like - attack merchants @100' and warships @5k or whatever, I would be all for it.

Obviously this is just my take, HR and their nuances are very personal to what each player perceives the game to be.

[BBfanboy]

My house rule against Jap AI is to ban all 2Es and 4Es from ground attack in contested hexes. NO GROUND ATTACK EVER IN CONTESTED HEXES BY 2Es AND 4Es. Only F/FB/DB and TB with bombs can fly ground attack (CAS) in contested hexes.

As for naval strike, I try to use small 4Es units at 100 feet. Best are 4E subgroups of 3 aircraft or those HQ squadrons of 3-5 aircraft, flying alone.

Yaab, I think you need to add LB to the ground attack list. The Russian IL-2 Sturmovik was designed as a ground support bomber and is classified as a Light Bomber, not a FB. It had some armour for its attack role.

As for strafing attacks against ships, only fighters/FBs and attack bombers had enough forward firing guns to suppress flak from their targets so they should be the only ones allowed to do the role. The B-17 may have had enough guns with the top and bottom turrets firing forward, but the bottom ones would not have been able to reach the target until really close (because the arc of the bullets would drop to the sea before reaching target). The B-17 was also too big a target and too valuable to use in the role. Loss of the aircraft meant loss of 11 crew IIRC.

[Yaab]

Sorry, I forgot about the LB. They are allowed to bomb contested hexes too.

[Gratch1111]

TY all, most interesting

[Chris21wen]

I investigated skip bombing and strafing and tested it. Skip bombing works like this in 26b.

Skip bombing occurs when attack bombers (AB) are set to an altitude 5K and below, the release point being 100’. ABs at altitudes above 5K are level bombing. Sometimes normal level bombers will also skip bomb if set to altitudes <2K and they pass a random check as the raid goes in.

In game, any bomber can bomb from a low level, irrespective of type or model or their LowN or lowG skills. LowN and lowG skills just help reduce losses and improve accuracy 2K and below. This low level bombing is not generally skip bombing but there does appear to be a random possibility that some normal LBs will skip if below 2K. The reason I say this is I've observed them attacking in flights of 1-2, as AB do.

The game does not specifically tell you when a unit is skip bombing or not, but you can see it in operation via the Combat Animations and the result in the Combat Report.
• The combat animation normally shows level bombing being carried out by flights consisting of 3-4 ac. If aircraft skip bombing these flight consist of 1-2 ac, usually 1.
• If you see a large number of hits then its a sure bet some if not all of the aircraft in the raid skip bombed.
• In the combat report, attacking aircraft skip bombing are indicated by 'bombing form low level' whereas for level bombing it just says 'bombing from xxxx feet'. E.g. 20 x B-25J11 Mitchell bombing and strafing from low level or 6 x B-25J1 Mitchell bombing from 100 feet. For LBA only these attacks are carried out with half the normal bomb load. Note that this helps to stop low level ship killers.

Note: Although any bomber could skip bomb, historically it was carried out by medium attack bombers although at least one B-17 group also had success. It was in fact the pioneer.

If this works consistanly there should be no need to have any house rules.

[Maallon]

The reason I used the HR until now is because 4E Bombers can be too overpowered in that role.
This can be tested by setting all 4E Bombers at Pearl Harbor to Naval Attack at the lowest possible altitude and (random factor permitting) watch them absolutely wreck KB on turn 1.

My knowledge on this might be outdated but as far as I understand it, the game calculates a chance to hit for each bomb a plane is carrying. So a single B-17 gets 8x chances to hit a target during one attack run. One bomb already does hurt quite a bit and some of them are bound to hit, even with low pilot skills. (Lets not talk about high pilot skill...)
I think this is also the reason why the Bottlenecks mod converts the 8 bombs of the B-17 into a single bomb with the power of 8 bombs. This way it only gets one chance to hit and not eight.
If this still holds true, I think the HR is valid as the Allies otherwise get a far too powerful anti-ship weapon far too early in the game. The B-25 and the like are usually excluded from that house rule because they are much easier to shoot down and carry a smaller bomb load, making them more balanced in that role.

As I said, this info might be outdated or I remember stuff wrong. If someone knows for certain how the mechanics work or has an informed opinion that the 8x chance to hit is not that big of a deal, then let me know.

[Bullshark]

B 25 G & H models get the "Bombing and Strafing at Low Naval Attack" message, when set for Nav 5k ft.

Only planes I think do this. I think its related to their armament and all those forward firing weapons. They
are some of the most awesome (and feared) planes, range 11. I had to trade out my NavB pilts of LowNav after I saw this.

[Bullshark]

4 EB

You have it right the 8 bombs and their size really hurt when they hit. But in actual use they where not accurate.
The Norden bombsight myth. Nimitz didn;t tell the truth about the B-17s at Midway to fool the Japanese! Brilliant!
How many ships were hit and how many were sunk in the entire war?

Let's not let the game fool you. Let history be your guide. Was 4 EB effective against Japanese ground forsces?
It was rarely done. It was meant and used for installation bombing not combat troops. In game I feel it should be
used as it was historically, against AF and Ports.

My HR "NO 4 EB set to Ground Attack , no 4 EB below 10K"

Two engine bombers have no restrictions. I use them to bomb the same target as the 4 EB but set to Ground Attack (same altitude) and it often times hits the AA unit and disrupts, damages it.
(I think I learned that from BB)

[Bullshark]

The trouble with HR's is that at Midway the 4 EB caused the carriers to react to their attack delaying the CAP
rotation. It WAS a big deal in ONE instance. But then theirs always the B @%C and D.

[RangerJoe]

At 1k feet or less, unless it is an attack bomber (or a TB carrying bombs when no torpedoes when the torpedo load is selected are available) then the normal 2E and/or 4E bomber's bomb load is halved. So the B17 would only carry 4 bombs. But when they were doing low naval attacks, they actually released the bombs one bomb at a time. So if the game were to emulate that with however as many attack runs as needed with damaged aircraft possibly aborting that attack run or any following runs, that would be realistic.

The float planes were not affected but the Dutch bombers only carried one bomb instead of three bombs. But somehow, I think that they got the job done . . .

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Samarinda at 65,96

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid spotted at 9 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Allied aircraft
OS2U-3 Kingfisher x 3

No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
xAK Meiten Maru, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires

Japanese ground losses:
83 casualties reported
Squads: 7 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 5 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x OS2U-3 Kingfisher bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 250 lb SAP Bomb

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Samarinda at 65,96

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid spotted at 3 NM, estimated altitude 4,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 1 minutes

Allied aircraft
139WH-3 x 6

No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
xAK Meiten Maru, Bomb hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage

Japanese ground losses:
35 casualties reported
Squads: 3 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x 139WH-3 bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 300 kg SAP Bomb

Although the Dutch bombers should use GP bombs with a slightly delayed fuse against the xAK . . .

[Maallon]

You must have given them some serious training RangerJoe, I rarely got any success with Dutch Bombers in my games so far.

Interesting that their bomb load is halved at 1k and below, I completely forgot about that one.
Although they would have a full bomb load at 2k which is still low enough to score consistent hits and 4 bombs at 1k is also not a small amount.

I think there are two main problems with 4E Bombers naval attack:

• Due to the fact that every single bomb will have a chance to hit on a target, they just score far too many hits on ships far too easily if flown at low altitudes.
• Allied 4E Bombers are very tough making them very hard to shoot down. This is especially the case during the early game while Japan has still only its first generation fighters. Even 2nd generation fighter can struggle with them though.

The Scenario I am kind of afraid of is:
It is not unusual for the Allies to employ 4E Bombers in large numbers around the end of 1942 and start of 1943, sometimes even concentrating them to such an extent that 50-70 bombers attack a single base. Now if KB should happen to sail by one of these 4E Bomber bases and the Allied player just switches all of them to Naval attack at 1k or 2k...I honestly can't see how KB would survive this without getting crippled, if not annihilated. Admittedly this is somewhat of an artificial situation as 1) they would actually all need to find KB in the first place and 2) the Allied player would need to train all of this bomber pilots in the appropriate skills. But still, situations similar to this are possible.

Therefore I stand with the HR.

Also to clarify: My considerations stem from a pure gameplay perspective and not from a historical one. I always try to design HRs that result in a fun and challenging game for both sides. Allied 4E Bombers are one of the toughest opponents a Japanese player has to face during a campaign already, I don't think it would be particularly fun to have to deal with them at the open sea as well.

[RangerJoe]

You must have given them some serious training RangerJoe, I rarely got any success with Dutch Bombers in my games so far.

Interesting that their bomb load is halved at 1k and below, I completely forgot about that one.
Although they would have a full bomb load at 2k which is still low enough to score consistent hits and 4 bombs at 1k is also not a small amount.

I think there are two main problems with 4E Bombers naval attack:

• Due to the fact that every single bomb will have a chance to hit on a target, they just score far too many hits on ships far too easily if flown at low altitudes.
• Allied 4E Bombers are very tough making them very hard to shoot down. This is especially the case during the early game while Japan has still only its first generation fighters. Even 2nd generation fighter can struggle with them though.

The Scenario I am kind of afraid of is:
It is not unusual for the Allies to employ 4E Bombers in large numbers around the end of 1942 and start of 1943, sometimes even concentrating them to such an extent that 50-70 bombers attack a single base. Now if KB should happen to sail by one of these 4E Bomber bases and the Allied player just switches all of them to Naval attack at 1k or 2k...I honestly can't see how KB would survive this without getting crippled, if not annihilated. Admittedly this is somewhat of an artificial situation as 1) they would actually all need to find KB in the first place and 2) the Allied player would need to train all of this bomber pilots in the appropriate skills. But still, situations similar to this are possible.

Therefore I stand with the HR.

Also to clarify: My considerations stem from a pure gameplay perspective and not from a historical one. I always try to design HRs that result in a fun and challenging game for both sides. Allied 4E Bombers are one of the toughest opponents a Japanese player has to face during a campaign already, I don't think it would be particularly fun to have to deal with them at the open sea as well.

That was FIVE hits and not four!

They started training for LowNaval on the 8th of January. I once had ONE 300 kg bomb hit on an IJN CA that sank it - magazine explosion! But B-25s would have six 500lb or halved at three bombs while the DB7 (A-20s) would only have four 500lb bombs halved at two bombs. Some of those bomber pilots have LowNaval skills in the 60s. I might concentrate the pilots with the best LowNaval skills into a few units with B-25s while the rest would start bombing oil production and ground units. But I need to get more Allied fighter units in the area with good pilots . . .

But those short ranged TIVs or whatever those Dutch planes are do quite nicely with three 250kg bombs at low level. Too bad the Dutch don't get more pilots during the war . . .

As far as 4Es going after the KB or any IJN carrier groups, give them a good long range escort fighter with qualified pilots and have them fly at 20k. Essentially that would be one heck of a fighter sweep which can't be normally be done against carriers. Worse would be those 2E attack bombers flying faster at 20k with all of that forward firing firepower. Worse would be if you could have those A-26s go on anti-fighter sweeps . . .

But if those 4Es had to face the task forces AAA FOUR times to drop those bombs one at a time, their losses would go up - especially their OPs losses and failure to Return To Base losses.