B-17s and Warships

[John III]

I would like to vent, yet once agian, at the powers of B-17s to do things they NEVER did during the war.

I just staged a raid against Noumea in late-March 42 with the KB--Hiryu, Soryu, Shokaku, and Zuikaku. During the course of the turn, I was attacked by 25 or so fighters, 8 Dauntlesses, and 12 B-17s. My CAP of 63 Zeroes tore into them. At the end, the B-17s dropped their loads and hit Hiryu with 2 bombs. Next day--they hit her with THREE bombs. She is now in deep trouble due to a plane that NEVER scored a hit on a Japanese carrier during the WHOLE war.

The B-17 was a fantastic plane that helped win the war for the Allies; however, it SUCKED against any form of shipping. Doubt if anything can be done about this but it drives me nuts!

Anyone else concur and/or disagree???

[Sharkosaurus rex]

But the Allied players don't fly at 20-25k that their war-time counter-parts did. He might have been flying at the usual 6k which is apparently the best height for attacking shipping with level bombers in the game. The 6k altitude works the same for all level bombers.

[anarchyintheuk]

As far as I know IJN carriers were only attacked by B-17s once, at Midway. You can't really blame the B-17 for IJN carriers not sailing into attack range. A lack of historical results sometimes means a lack of historical opportunity. Furthering what Shark said, you can make B-17s more effective by attacking at a lower altitude, just like you can make the IJN a pretty good ASW fleet by actually escorting convoys or forming hunter-killer groups (something they didn't really do during WW2).

[dpstafford]

ORIGINAL: Sharkosaurus rex

But the Allied players don't fly at 20-25k that their war-time counter-parts did. He might have been flying at the usual 6k which is apparently the best height for attacking shipping with level bombers in the game. The 6k altitude works the same for all level bombers.

A good argument that "altitude" should have been abstracted out of WITP and only historical results implemented. Every represented level bomber can achieve ahistorical results by bombing at unrealistic altitudes in the game as is. The inclusion of player controlled "altitude" is one of the very few actual design flaws in WITP (as opposed to coding flaws of which there are many).

[Nikademus]

not for long.....

[;)]

[moses]

These were my bombers. The first flight was flying at 15,000 ft I believe and I think I had 20 or more attack. (12 may have been the number that go through the zero's.) The carriers were sitting 120 miles south of Numea. I had SBD's and a load of fighters also supporting the attack. I got two hits from the B17's but the SBD did the real damage landing a 1000 lb bomb.

The next day they hit the Hiryu, at 10,000 ft, which was covered by only 5 zero's and showed signs of significant damage. 3 bombs hit the crippled carrier. I don't know that it will get away as the carrier is still well within B17 range and I should get another strike. Plus his retreat path is toward luganville/Efeat(sp??) where I also have airfields.

I don't know how accurate the simulation is here since I don't recall a single instance where a large flight of heavy bombers attacked a large fleet. The only incident I know of is Midway which I think involved only a half-dozen aircraft attacking on thier own.

[dpstafford]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

not for long.....

[;)]

OK, so what do you know that the rest of us don't. And please, stick to the topic at hand....[8D]

[Nikademus]

many tings......many tings.


Wait for 3.0 of my mod.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: dpstafford

A good argument that "altitude" should have been abstracted out of WITP and only historical results implemented.

At that speed I may as well watch a movie as play WiTP. I favor historical capabilities used how the players choose. The results are often beyond what was achieved in real life because players can use thier forces differently and find different opportunities.

If bombing at 6,000 ft give B-17's greater chance to hit, it also gives them a greater chance to be hit by flak and greater ops losses.

Just offering my take on the historical results thing... [8D]

[Feinder]

Besides the SINGLE attack by Nells on PoW/Repulse, show me where Bettys and Nells regulary managed to put topedoes into Allied vessels.

Oh, but you weren't going to complain about that bit of fantasy, were you.

-F-

[CapAndGown]

The Chicago at Renell Island.

Another bit of fantasy you convienently forget.

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: Sharkosaurus rex

But the Allied players don't fly at 20-25k that their war-time counter-parts did. He might have been flying at the usual 6k which is apparently the best height for attacking shipping with level bombers in the game. The 6k altitude works the same for all level bombers.

Actually in the Pacific when B17s were flying their "anti-shipping" patrols in 1942 ... they routinely operated at 5,000 feet and bombed ships from this altitude ... however, the number of attested hits on warships moving at sea is very low ... in fact I can't recall any ... though one CA was hit early while at anchor in Davao ... but at anchor means not moving. House rule disallowing B17 from flying Naval strike mission is one possibility. B17s could still hit occasional ships while flying Naval Search mission, which would allow them roughly their historical capability.

[Feinder]

3 ships and 2 strikes.

Compare that to a week of activity in WitP.

Frankly, I don't give a rat's ass about Japanese LBA carrying torps. Do I personally think it's excessive? Sure. But do I actually care? No.

But to complain that B-17s hit his carriers...? Bah. The reason B-17s didn't hit Japanese carriers in WW2, was because
a. Unlike WitP player, the IJN wisely kept their carriers out of B-17 range.
b. There weren't very many carriers left to hit after Midway.

On the other hand, if you'd like, can post over 100 strikes on Japanese shipping in the space of only about 4 months, made by B-17s and 24s.

It just annoys me the inane "I like to play the Japanese, and I want to be able to clobber the Allies. Where are my power-ups and extra health-packs!". Japan didn't have a snow-balls chance in hell after 7:56am on December 7th. But because of the endless whining, this game goes farther and farther into the realm of Fantasy.

[8|]

-F-

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: Sharkosaurus rex

But the Allied players don't fly at 20-25k that their war-time counter-parts did. He might have been flying at the usual 6k which is apparently the best height for attacking shipping with level bombers in the game. The 6k altitude works the same for all level bombers.

Actually in the Pacific when B17s were flying their "anti-shipping" patrols in 1942 ... they routinely operated at 5,000 feet and bombed ships from this altitude ... however, the number of attested hits on warships moving at sea is very low ... in fact I can't recall any ... though one CA was hit early while at anchor in Davao ... but at anchor means not moving. House rule disallowing B17 from flying Naval strike mission is one possibility. B17s could still hit occasional ships while flying Naval Search mission, which would allow them roughly their historical capability.

iirc - B-24s did something similar and hit and sank (or at least were given credit for) several IJN warships, up to cruiser size.

[dpstafford]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

Wait for 3.0 of my mod.

Uh....which one is your mod again???

[Nikademus]

the oh so originally named "NikMod" at spooky's site. (if anyone has a better name i'm all for it) [;)]

3.0 not deployed yet. Still working on it but i'm juggling several balls right now so its a bit slow going. Current version does help with B-17 naval a bit as i lowered bomb loadout.

[Gem35]

Feinder, I'm glad you are on my side. [:D]

[EasilyConfused]

Why is this posted in the war room? If you have a complaint, do it in the correct forum, so people who don't want to hear it can ignore it.

[dpstafford]

ORIGINAL: witpqs
At that speed I may as well watch a movie as play WiTP. I favor historical capabilities used how the players choose. The results are often beyond what was achieved in real life because players can use thier forces differently and find different opportunities.

If bombing at 6,000 ft give B-17's greater chance to hit, it also gives them a greater chance to be hit by flak and greater ops losses.

Problem is that since B-17's were never used historically at 6000 ft against warships at sea, the results we get doing so in WITP is just somebody's guess. And probably a bad one. My suggestion of abstracting altitude out of the game solves the problem neatly. And makes the game more realistic (which is NOT a dirty word).

Now get yourself back to that Hollywood movie version on WITP where Benifer Quafflack wipes out the entire IJN in his low flying B-17.

[CapAndGown]

ORIGINAL: Feinder

3 ships and 2 strikes.

4 ships in 3 strikes. The Chicago was first hit in the evening. Then the next day another Betty strike came in an hit the Chicago and an escorting DD. Also, one of the DDs damaged during the landings at Lunga was believed sunk by Betties the next day as it retired from Guadancanal.

Lets call that 5 ships in 4 strikes.