Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: herwin

I'm curious. Knowing something of air ops, I'm aware it's easier to take off than land in bad weather. It's also easier to take off from a base than to find the same base and bomb it. How does this affect this logic?

This is where I was going with the bit about a break in the weather - target base is socked in and cancels strikes. CAP may be up but the weather makes it very difficult to intercept. Attack arrives - in the vast majority of cases "unable to locate target". In 'unknown % of cases' the strike slips onto the target through a break in the weather.

Is this possible in the game engine code? If so, how likely is it? How likely should it be, to be realistic?

Note the lack of a CAP intercept does not prove the CAP was grounded.

BTW, I am not proposing this did happen, rather posing it as a possibility given the unknown nature of the code and thinking of the times historically that one carrier or another was weathered in during a series of strikes. I wonder if the designer considered this scenario to be a realistic possibility and made it possible in game.

Had Speedy’s bombers not landed back on the non-damaged CV’s, we’d have no proof they ever flew. But we do know they flew, so we have to assume it was a failed location roll by the leader squadron that forced the strike to fail to locate the target.

If there is doubt about what happened here, I would suggest that Speedy checks the saves before and after that turn (if they still exist) and compare the fatigue level of his strike squadrons. If the weather caused the mission to be aborted without taking off, then there should be no increase in fatigue. If, however, there is an increase in fatigue, it means that the planes took off and came back without locating the target.

And since only one group of Vals was reported as "unable to locate the target", it would mean that every other group with increased fatigue was part of that strike and followed the lead...and since that (possible) situation is described in the manual, it's WAD.

[font="times new roman"]Speedy I had something similar happen to me in my game vs Floyd G.  I spotted his carriers and had actually already had an enegagement with them 2 days earlier. I spot him-spotted one of his carrier by name, react, then he strikes me, and strikes me, etc.[/font]
[font="times new roman"][/font] 
[font="times new roman"]Let me quote part of my AAR (slightly edited)[/font]
"[font="times new roman"]I really don’t understand it! The SORYU & HIRYU[/b] spot the US Carriers 1st and React towards them moving from 5 to 4 hexes away. I spot him 1st, my VALs & KATEs are actually in range @ 5 hexes albeit extended, but yet we don’t strike after we React? Now the US CVs didn’t move…why did we move towards them if we weren’t going to strike? Makes no freaking sense to me. Maybe I’m crying, but come on why react towards them if you’re not planning to launch a strike! Well not only do we not launch a strike, but he hits me multiple times (5 I think) before my strike even gets to him" [/font]
[font="times new roman"][/font] 
[font="times new roman"]My strike was launched in the same phase but only one of my Carriers KATES were involved in the strike-which once more sucked for me and confused me even more. None of my KATE groups were assigned to any Naval Search, the VALs had 20%.[/font]
[font="times new roman"][/font] 
[font="times new roman"]Bad Luck can really suck![/font]
[font="times new roman"][/font] 

Hi guys,
 
End result of this is that the following were sunk:
 
Shokaku
Zuikaku
Soryu
Yamashiro
Kinu
 
Time to dig and fortify everything and make him bleed. I will take China soon which will help.
 
I hope my Father becoems over confident now and goes for invasions. I can still get him for now with CV/LBA......

Your own Dad.  Not very nice Speedy. [:-] [:D]

How many of your CV pilots did you lose?

LOTS

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Your own Dad.  Not very nice Speedy. [:-] [:D]

Yeah, whatever happened to "Honour thy father and mother"...?[:D]

I was wondering about this myself all along.

I know of CV's/TF's being saved from attack by slipping under bad weather (Zuikaku in the Coral Sea instantly comes to mind),
But other than that, I can't recall instances of CV's failing to launch a strike because of rain or overcast.

[&:]

ORIGINAL: herwin

I'm curious. Knowing something of air ops, I'm aware it's easier to take off than land in bad weather. It's also easier to take off from a base than to find the same base and bomb it. How does this affect this logic?

Speedy,
 
The weather seems to prefectly explain what happened, however I wonder if your father parked so many fighters on 90% CAP (or LRCAP specifically over his carries) on Midway that it considerably outnumbered your fighter escort numbers.  If so, it might have been a contributing factor.
 
Alfred

No. Dad confirmed he didn't know anything aboue this or what was happening. He didn't see me coming.

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
Again....if that were the case, it would be reported much more frequently

You should look at the three land based air attacks I just made in my AAR (post 339). None of the raids that located a target targeted KB. During the turn there was perhaps 7-8 squadron x failed to locate target reports for each of the two phases, so I think failing to locate CV's is far more common than you think.

For information every single B-17 and B-24 squadron had naval search 20% set and I got multiple sighting reports of KB during the turn, so it was spotted. My bombers did launch, but they simply failed to find the target.

Jim

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Does anyone have any constructive thoughts as to WHY KB planes did not attack the American CV's?

One of my wishes for AE is more feedback on why particular things happen - limited by fog of war of course. ßomething like this should be on the battle report since the first thing HQ is going to ask is "Why didn't you get a counter strike off?"

- Weather
- Cowardice
- No targets sighted
- Whatever...

I find things like this happening quite a bit in my games, and it would be great to have some idea why. WitP has an amazing amount of data that it's making decisions on and it would be great if more of it was exposed to the user (again fog of war dependent).