Ridiculous
Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
RE: Ridiculous
Hi all,
I completely agree with Mike Scholl & Nikademus on this. I am happy they are making the mid war auto victory optional as we all know it is more a sop to Japan than anything else.
The only problem that i possibly see is from my tests on air strike composition. It does seem that strikes are made up by group rather aircraft.
I am certainly not 100% sure but i think that might be one problem we are seeing. Think about it, 3 groups on a Japanese carrier, 4 groups on an American carrier. 1/3rd more likely uncoordinated plusthe American coordination rules in '42.
Mike
I completely agree with Mike Scholl & Nikademus on this. I am happy they are making the mid war auto victory optional as we all know it is more a sop to Japan than anything else.
The only problem that i possibly see is from my tests on air strike composition. It does seem that strikes are made up by group rather aircraft.
I am certainly not 100% sure but i think that might be one problem we are seeing. Think about it, 3 groups on a Japanese carrier, 4 groups on an American carrier. 1/3rd more likely uncoordinated plusthe American coordination rules in '42.
Mike

RE: Ridiculous
Actually thats not correct. In the aftermath of PH the USN conducted itself defensively though it toyed with the idea of a reinforcement of Wake. After that hit and run raids were decided upon. minimal risk for hopefully a better gain.
The first true carrier vs carrier clash did not occur until may of 42 and thanks to US intel, and Japanese underestimation....it ended up being a 2 CV on 2CV battle...which then resulted in the next battle being not as lopsided as it might have been.
In the game, if a US player rushes in where angels fear to tread, they will more likely than not find it's their own julular that gets cut.
This does not mean the model is broken.....it means the Allied player acted foolishly.
The first true carrier vs carrier clash did not occur until may of 42 and thanks to US intel, and Japanese underestimation....it ended up being a 2 CV on 2CV battle...which then resulted in the next battle being not as lopsided as it might have been.
In the game, if a US player rushes in where angels fear to tread, they will more likely than not find it's their own julular that gets cut.
This does not mean the model is broken.....it means the Allied player acted foolishly.
RE: Ridiculous
Hi, If either player uses his CV willynilly he will lose them.
Both players should
Always know where enemy CV are operating. If you don't know where they are assume they are where they can do the most harm.
Fight CV battles close to home. (save your cripples while the enemy cripples are lost trying to make port.)
Prepare for carrier battles. Have support ships in area to repair damage. Have airfields for displaced airgroups.
Have friendly land based air for search and help wearing out enemy CAP.
Think about why carriers are needed?
The USN should avoid carrier battles except for when Japanese intentions and strength are known.
USN CV should always take the stance when spotted that the IJN CV are now racing to that location at full speed.
IJN CV in groups of less then 3 should always take the stance when spotted the the USN CV are now racing to that location at full speed if (and this is a big if) The USN player also knows where the other 3 IJN CV are located and they are not in supporting range.
Both players should
Always know where enemy CV are operating. If you don't know where they are assume they are where they can do the most harm.
Fight CV battles close to home. (save your cripples while the enemy cripples are lost trying to make port.)
Prepare for carrier battles. Have support ships in area to repair damage. Have airfields for displaced airgroups.
Have friendly land based air for search and help wearing out enemy CAP.
Think about why carriers are needed?
The USN should avoid carrier battles except for when Japanese intentions and strength are known.
USN CV should always take the stance when spotted that the IJN CV are now racing to that location at full speed.
IJN CV in groups of less then 3 should always take the stance when spotted the the USN CV are now racing to that location at full speed if (and this is a big if) The USN player also knows where the other 3 IJN CV are located and they are not in supporting range.
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
RE: Ridiculous
That will be one of the harder things for people to realize. Leadership ratings of assigned commanders aside, we are providing the leadership for both sides in this war.
This is something that i have tried to say before, but said poorly; it was not American production that won the war or the lack of Japanese production. It was not the B29 or the P47.
The war was won, in large part, due to American leadership and the idiocy of high level Japanese leaders.
If we, as the Japanese player, play well does that mean the game is broken? If an Allied player is not as good as the Allies were historically, does that mean the game is broken?
In one of my Pbem games I am Japan at the end of Dec '41. My opponent launched a 3 carrier raid againstthe Marshall islands. Why? I don't know. But he had F4f3's and Buffalo's as fighters and my 4 carriers worth of Zeros tore his fighters to pieces.
He came to my land bombers instead of the other way around, they put a torp into Lex and my 4 heavies finished off all 3 of his carriers.
Is the game broken because I won this battle? I don't think so. I do not want to call it a stupid move as i respect my opponent, and he is wacking me in the air already in SE Asia. He keeps shifting units around and hitting me where i am weak.
However, I suspect he launched this attack out of frustration, or just hoping my carriers were in the Indies. But what would he have gained? Destroy a few float planes, sink a couple MSW, old DD's, a transport or two. Was that worth the risk of sending 3 carriers? I do not think so.
The Americans in the real world never made a major mistake with valuable assets during the war. They came close, but they ressisted. They waited to engage until they could engage on their terms.
Mike
This is something that i have tried to say before, but said poorly; it was not American production that won the war or the lack of Japanese production. It was not the B29 or the P47.
The war was won, in large part, due to American leadership and the idiocy of high level Japanese leaders.
If we, as the Japanese player, play well does that mean the game is broken? If an Allied player is not as good as the Allies were historically, does that mean the game is broken?
In one of my Pbem games I am Japan at the end of Dec '41. My opponent launched a 3 carrier raid againstthe Marshall islands. Why? I don't know. But he had F4f3's and Buffalo's as fighters and my 4 carriers worth of Zeros tore his fighters to pieces.
He came to my land bombers instead of the other way around, they put a torp into Lex and my 4 heavies finished off all 3 of his carriers.
Is the game broken because I won this battle? I don't think so. I do not want to call it a stupid move as i respect my opponent, and he is wacking me in the air already in SE Asia. He keeps shifting units around and hitting me where i am weak.
However, I suspect he launched this attack out of frustration, or just hoping my carriers were in the Indies. But what would he have gained? Destroy a few float planes, sink a couple MSW, old DD's, a transport or two. Was that worth the risk of sending 3 carriers? I do not think so.
The Americans in the real world never made a major mistake with valuable assets during the war. They came close, but they ressisted. They waited to engage until they could engage on their terms.
Mike

- Tristanjohn
- Posts: 3027
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 4:50 am
- Location: Daly City CA USA
- Contact:
RE: Ridiculous
ORIGINAL: Lemurs!
That will be one of the harder things for people to realize. Leadership ratings of assigned commanders aside, we are providing the leadership for both sides in this war.
This is something that i have tried to say before, but said poorly; it was not American production that won the war or the lack of Japanese production. It was not the B29 or the P47.
The war was won, in large part, due to American leadership and the idiocy of high level Japanese leaders.
If we, as the Japanese player, play well does that mean the game is broken? If an Allied player is not as good as the Allies were historically, does that mean the game is broken?
Sorry, but that's nonsense. Both sides made their share of mistakes, both sides had their share of good and mediocre and downright bad leadership. Both sides had to endure "political" decisions taken from above. Both side did not enjoy the same hardware or the same hardware in the same numbers.
Figure it out.
Regarding Frank Jack Fletcher: They should have named an oiler after him instead. -- Irrelevant
RE: Ridiculous
ORIGINAL: Mogami
Hi, If either player uses his CV willynilly he will lose them.
Both players should
I disagree with this statement completely. It has been my experience that any time I catch the enemy carriers (japanese) i always get the worst end of the battle, my current woes not withstanding. My first game with Xargun, he was sinking my carriers while my 1000 lb bombs were bouncing off the deck.

RE: Ridiculous
Hi, I am sure any 1000pd bomb hits produced damage. I am interested in this "caught the Japanese" you out numbered him and still lost. (The most common result for a carrier battle in my opinion should be a tactical draw. It is up to the big picture to decide who actually came out ahead in any battle)
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
RE: Ridiculous
ORIGINAL: rroberson
I disagree with this statement completely. It has been my experience that any time I catch the enemy carriers (japanese) i always get the worst end of the battle, my current woes not withstanding. My first game with Xargun, he was sinking my carriers while my 1000 lb bombs were bouncing off the deck.
Here is a tip for judging this better in the future. (in terms of FOW) I have found through observation there is a definate tell-tale sign that a reported bomb hit (or shell or torpedo for that matter) is either a dud or a FOW error. If after the hit is reported you dont receive a "damage description" afterwards before the next strike.....it never really happened.
example:
9 x SBD diving on CV Akaki
1000lb Bomb hit
*Severe damage*
(this is most probably a real hit)
1000LB bomb hit
--------
(no description , its a bogus claim)
RE: Ridiculous
if I bring the same amount of planes and carriers to the party that my enemy does, and get a launch [:D], I should be able to at least fight him to a draw. That has yet to be the case in any carrier battle I have fought. I dont throw my assets away. Every time I commit to battle I spend weeks considering the odds.

RE: Ridiculous
My ships sank his lived to fight another day. In the famous battle of wake island...my two carriers caught three of his...he never knew I was there. I did a bit of damage to him, he countered striked and sank one of mine outright and heavily damaged the other one. A month later in the famous battle of midway same situation...I catch him ...he doesnt spot me, I get the first launch off...do a bit of damage, his counter strike sinks one of mine and leaves the other one burning.

RE: Ridiculous
The Americans in the real world never made a major mistake with valuable assets during the war. They came close, but they ressisted. They waited to engage until they could engage on their terms.
Mike
Leaving Leyte Gulf aside...I tend to agree with you. American command and decisions were much better than Japanese, and that played a big factor to win in 1945.
However ,USA should've done it EXTREMELY Bad, and Japan REALLY good for USA no to win that war. Material superiority was too much of an advantage, for Japan had roughly 1/10th of America's war production capability at the starting of the war...and the difference was being increased as time passed by.
RAM
"Look at me! look at me!!!
Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"
"Look at me! look at me!!!
Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"
RE: Ridiculous
bomb hits tend to damage. Torpedo hits tend to sink. Fire of course should be a risk but the system has been acknowledged to not be all it could be here. There is therefore no chance of fires burning out of control. They will always go down but the higher the level the more SYS they will pile up. This 'can' be very dangerous to the Japanese player if he already has a good amount of SYS becuase once over 50% progressive FLT damage can occur even where there was none before. I lost Akagi that way when i attacked the west coast, far from a base.
RE: Ridiculous
No you shouldn't quite ... heres why:
Japan = 6 CV's, 400 aicraft roughly
Yanks = 4 CV's, 400 aircraft roughly
Assuming all fly and fight (balanced out)
Japan has the same number of aircraft hitting 4 targets as the Yanks have hitting 6 targets.
Thats means more chances of hitting the target for Japan. It's a very simple odds thing.
1 CV vs 3 CVL = same number of aircraft yet the deck is stacked against the CV.
If that 1 CV gets 50% SYS vs 2 of the 3 CVL getting 50% SYS, we now have aircraft still going after the CV vs no aircraft going after the CVL.
This is generally why the Yanks loose the early battles. It's simple odds.
Mission killing a Yank CV takes out roughly 90 aircraft. Mission killing a Jap CV takes out far less. (mission kill = 50% sys)
It is not until the Yank aircraft upgrade to where a mission kill does not alter the effectiveness of their CAP that the roles are forever reversed.
Sure, the yanks are harder to kill but they are also more likely to be targets.
Japan = 6 CV's, 400 aicraft roughly
Yanks = 4 CV's, 400 aircraft roughly
Assuming all fly and fight (balanced out)
Japan has the same number of aircraft hitting 4 targets as the Yanks have hitting 6 targets.
Thats means more chances of hitting the target for Japan. It's a very simple odds thing.
1 CV vs 3 CVL = same number of aircraft yet the deck is stacked against the CV.
If that 1 CV gets 50% SYS vs 2 of the 3 CVL getting 50% SYS, we now have aircraft still going after the CV vs no aircraft going after the CVL.
This is generally why the Yanks loose the early battles. It's simple odds.
Mission killing a Yank CV takes out roughly 90 aircraft. Mission killing a Jap CV takes out far less. (mission kill = 50% sys)
It is not until the Yank aircraft upgrade to where a mission kill does not alter the effectiveness of their CAP that the roles are forever reversed.
Sure, the yanks are harder to kill but they are also more likely to be targets.
RE: Ridiculous
ORIGINAL: Nikademus
I lost Akagi that way when i attacked the west coast, far from a base.
and I thought you'd be a great adversary!!!! Nik I want to play you!!!
(only if you keep attacking the west coast with your carriers, that is [;)])
RAM
"Look at me! look at me!!!
Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"
"Look at me! look at me!!!
Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"
RE: Ridiculous
ORIGINAL: rroberson
My ships sank his lived to fight another day. In the famous battle of wake island...my two carriers caught three of his...he never knew I was there. I did a bit of damage to him, he countered striked and sank one of mine outright and heavily damaged the other one. A month later in the famous battle of midway same situation...I catch him ...he doesnt spot me, I get the first launch off...do a bit of damage, his counter strike sinks one of mine and leaves the other one burning.
Hi, Don't take the order you see strikes occur as anything. If he didn't see you he would not launch a strike at all. I think the USN dive bombers are as good as Japanese at start. (1000lb bomb versus 500lb bomb) But USN torpedo planes don't count and early in game the USN CV are understrength in fighters. So more enemy bombers get through your CAP and fewer of your bombers get through his CAP. Had the Japanese been caught by surprise (with airgroups set to bomb Midway) you would have cleaned up.
So the problem is number of torpedo hits. His divebombers will not sink USN CV outright very often. 2xUSN CV=30 torpedo planes. range of 2 hexes. 3xIJN CV=60+ torpedo planes range of 4 with torpedo 5 with bomb.
Around Mid 42 USN torpedo plane increases range to that of divebombers.
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
RE: Ridiculous
ORIGINAL: RAM
[and I thought you'd be a great adversary!!!! Nik I want to play you!!!
(only if you keep attacking the west coast with your carriers, that is [;)])
HEY! it wasn't MY idea.....it was the BANANA's idea. I just implemented his Imperial wishes since everyone was saying that the US West coast was invadable. So invaded i did.
It did not necessarily turn out to our advantage.....[X(]
RE: Ridiculous
what are you smok....
erm...
what do you mean????? the banana???? I thought LSD was bad but seems in your case gives funny visions????

erm...
what do you mean????? the banana???? I thought LSD was bad but seems in your case gives funny visions????

RAM
"Look at me! look at me!!!
Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"
"Look at me! look at me!!!
Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"
RE: Ridiculous
It did not necessarily turn out to our advantage.....
Paraphrasing the best line ever in a speech by the emperor of a ravaged country.[:D]
Fear the kitten!
RE: Ridiculous
ORIGINAL: RAM
what are you smok....
erm...
what do you mean????? the banana???? I thought LSD was bad but seems in your case gives funny visions????
![]()
arrrg!!!!!
DEATH TO THE BANANA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


