Forlorn Hopes: The Japanese Respond

[Kereguelen]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

I've run late-war tests on this and had KB CAP from 8 CVs mounting about 350 fighters which was "proof" against 100 fighters and 350 four-engined bombers ( a reasonable strike from a Level 9 airfield ) . Sure, some bombers got through but there were very few, they were very disrupted and they didn't render any CVs incapable of further action. That's pretty much a worst-case scenario right there.

I doubt you'd be facing anything close to that so so long as you have enough fighters over your CVs you should be able to butcher those bombers. The key is filling the air with defending fighters even if they are only 50 or 60 Exp.

Have thrashed KB (under heavy CAP umbrella) in late-war (PBEM; game was in 1943; vanilla) game with a far lower number of Allied planes attacking (combination of P-38 fighters, B-25 bombers and some B-24's). The key was having highly experienced Allied pilots in the airgroups. It were the B-25's (XP 85+) that killed the Japanese carriers, btw. KB is by now means "proof" when coming into range of experienced land based Allied air groups.

[John 3rd]

Thanks guys.  I am going to see what Dan chooses to do. 

Nemo I will think about what you have said.  I have simply never thought of this game in such a 'technical' manner before.

The bottom line is that I can do this sort of an operation whenever I want to.  I only have the KB left as any form of deterrent for keeping Dan honest within the game. 

I think all he is seeing is Victory Points while I'm fighting to survive as Japan.  This is a very different mindset.  There is the very real probability that Dan will not even try to land on another island.  If that is the case then what is the point.  He can bomb Japan into oblivion over time.  Only thing I can do is make the bombing so costly that he feels like he must have more bases.  Issue with that is he'll probably use China even more then he is right now for the B-29s.  Guess I'm saying what is the point?

Hmmm....

SUBJECT CHANGE:  The film Father and I went to see was Valkyrie.  I went in dreading the film.  As a Historian by trade I hate Hollywood and movies.  They can be very good (Gettysburg/Glory/Saving Private Ryan) or terrible (PEARL HARBOR).  This film had been panned by reviewers but I have to admit that I was truly engaged by the story and the whole July 20th Bomb Plot.  Have to admit my knowledge is not very deep here but I truly thought the film had some fine moments.

Since this is my own AAR, I will happily permit it to be hijacked for film discussion and/or review.

[John 3rd]

Operation Shimakaze
June 22, 1944

The "Attack" Order is given by Combined Fleet at 1800 hours on June 21st. If all goes well a force of nearly 1,500 planes will descend on Iwo Jima tomorrow PRIOR to a massive relief Fleet arriving on scene. Everything will be attacked: the AF, Impossible-to-have Port, and Task Forces surrounding the atoll.

This is how it lays out:

[JeffroK]

[font="comic sans ms, minion condensed, ms sans serif"]"Morituri te salutamus"

Good Luck.
[/font]

[modrow]

Nemo,

thanks for your sharing your insight. Your suggestion made me start a series of tests which are quite instructive...

I got another question for you related to this. In my series of tests, this is a typical result for a break through CAP (by now allied bombers are trained to about 70, exp of other planes as in the tests mentioned above, i.e. no brilliant fighter pilots for IJN).


TEST RESULT * NOT FROM JOHN'S GAME


A6M5 Zeke x 289

Allied aircraft
F6F Hellcat x 102
B-25J Mitchell x 33
PB4Y Liberator x 11
B-24J Liberator x 32
B-29 Superfortress x 164

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zeke: 172 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F6F Hellcat: 84 destroyed
B-25J Mitchell: 11 destroyed, 11 damaged
PB4Y Liberator: 1 destroyed
B-24J Liberator: 2 destroyed, 9 damaged
B-29 Superfortress: 7 destroyed, 40 damaged

Allied morale was high, so only few planes turned back. When I saw after a2a about 120 Superforts, 30 Liberators and 20 Mitchells remaining to drop bombs, I was sure KB would be toast. Here's what these 170 level 70 exp bombers did achieve:

Japanese Ships
CVL Zuiho, Bomb hits 2
BB Haruna, Bomb hits 2
CVL Ryuho, Bomb hits 9, on fire, heavy damage
CV Zuikaku, Bomb hits 7, on fire
BB Kongo, Bomb hits 1
BB Musashi, Bomb hits 1
CV Taiho, Bomb hits 3
CA Tone
CA Chikuma

Ryuho is looking bad, but the rest of the ships is fine...

Now my question: In view of these results, it looks to me there must be a feedback mechanism affecting the precision of bombing. This may also explain why high EXP bombers are deadly even against strong CAP - the reduction is not sufficiently strong to make hits a rare thing to occur. Do you know how that feedback works ? You talk about disruption, how is that factored in ?

Thanks

Hartwig

[pat.casey]

My prediction:

IWO gets plastered, but so does KB.

Definately going to be a fun one.

[John 3rd]

I do not describe that as fun.  We shall see what happens.  Since Dan launched those 4EB on the 20th with nothing happening on the 21st I hope he flings them somewhere else this turn.  With his CV approaching perhaps he will get a little over-confident.

The hope is for a 4EB strike at one of the 3 AF that have been plastering Tori Shima.  I launched the biggest raid yet on that poor base June 21st.  The island was crushed by 35 Night Bombers, 300 Army Bombers, and 150 Fighters.  Have to admit the six days worth of strikes have helped with my Fighters state of experience!

The Kaigun will approach to five hexes distance and attack.  The CAP is set at 60% which should yield roughly 225 Zero flying over the CVs.  CV Deployment is the same as my Raid:

KB-1  Akagi, Kaga, Ryujo
KB-2  Shokaku, Zuikaku, Chitose
KB-3  Amagi, Unryu, Zuiho
KB-4  Taiho, Ryuho, Shoho

I can only hope my suicide and diversion TF draw some Allied fire from the CVs. 

Regardless the die is cast and mission is running.  We're waiting on the turn coming back.

[Nemo121]

Guys, well there's no certainty in war. There is, at best, probability.
 
Hartwig, I would find 1/3rd Hellcat to be quite a bit of overmatch for that many A6M5s. By the time that many A6M5s are downed there are few firing passes left for the bombers. In addition in reality it is unlikely that any bombers would be so fresh and with such high morale.
 
I think that also you should try to make sure the Japanese mount 350 fighters as CAP. 290 fighters ON CAP is a lot weaker than 350 in these circumstances as the number of fighters which get through to the bombers is going to be "Total CAP - those killed by fighters". So, if fighters kill 150 A6M5s then you get 140 fighters going for the bombers when 290 are on CAP. When 350 are on CAP you get 200 breaking into the bomber streams which is a 50% increase in "quality passes on bombers" for only a 16% increase in total CAP.
 
50% more fighters would disrupt those bombers a lot more.
 
 
In addition my tests were conducted with bombers with some fatigue etc etc and non-perfect morale so I'm sure I generated a lot of "turning back".
 
Lastly I can confirm that any fighter interception acts to degrade the accuracy of bombing such that it is worthwhile intercepting even if the fighters shoot little down.
 
 
So, if you run this again with no better than 70 morale ( which I consider quite normal for a group in combat ) and with fatigue for about 1/2 the bombers at 25% ( to represent flying in for the strike etc ) AND you up the A6M5 numbers to 350 then I think:
a) you'll see far more fighters get through to the bombers and
b) you'll see far, far fewer bombers get through.
 
Sure, your CVs will still suffer a few hits but if only 50 disrupted bombers get through your fleet should really survive with only minor damage. Certainly nothing approaching the death and destruction most would expect.
 
 
This can be expressed as an equation if you're interested - that might be more illustrative even if the relative weighting of factors needs to be determined.

[John 3rd]

Operation Shimakaze
June 22, 1944

Before I even start I must state that I have asked Dan for a mulligan on this turn.

Everyone has seen the plan as detailed above.  It worked out quite well with two exceptions:

1.  Tokyo's missions were all cancelled due to weather.  OK.  I accept that without issue.
2.  Had a smaller force at Tsu (150 planes) not fly but that isn't a big deal.
3.  Pagan Strike Flew as planned and did OK.  WOW--US AA is NASTY over AF!
4.  Saipan Strike flew as planned and hit shipping as well as AF.
5.  KB flew NOTHING!  [:@][:o][:@]

For some stupid reason they didn't launch a single aircraft.  I checked after watching and saw they moved only FOUR hexes instead of FIVE!  Fuel was fine with the CVs but Akagi/Kaga decided to F#&%@($ refuel for no apparent reason.  Dammit I hate this game!

We'll see what Dan says and I will get back to you. 

[modrow]

John,

sorry to hijack your thread by this discussion with Nemo. I hope that being an educator you understand – I am learning a lot right now.


Nemo,

I am aware I put too much load on the CAP – I slowly increased it in my (still incomplete) series of test. If you take 50 +/- 10 Hellcats, you get virtually no penetration and quite some amount of bomber losses – nasty results for the Allied rather than disaster for IJN. I can only confirm that based on the tests I did run you don’t see anything close to the death and destruction one might –and I did- expect.

The interesting issue for me to see was that even under almost “perfect” conditions for the attackers re. morale and fatigue and even if a large number of bombers penetrates without being damaged, they do not perform well. This is interesting, as it allows for some buffer in case you calculated with a CAP of 60 and get 90...

This observation seems to indicate that the A2A model has a significant influence on the bombing model.

So far, I was aware that generally higher numbers lead to nonlinear effects in the A2A model (though I had never worked with such a massive CAP before, so I was astonished to see how hard this nonlinear effect strikes if high numbers of planes are involved) and that the presence of CAP adds disruption for the bombers.

I had expected the effectiveness of the bombing to be dependent on the ratio of damaged and killed bombers relative to the strike package only, assuming that morale drop and similar side effects would be only correlated to this entity.

Instead, here, you get a big deterioration of bombing efficiency even though the bombers were not harmed that much. That is very surprising to me, and I would like to understand it better.

If you can provide a formula, this would be great – I am very interested. Math is much more efficient than language to express these things…

Thanks again – as mentioned above, I am just learning a lot !

Hartwig

[John 3rd]

That is not a problem Hartwig.

Dan won't allow the mulligan and so we move on.  Gawd I HATE the DAMNED AI.  [:@][:o][:@]

[modrow]

John,

so KB did not fly a single plane and was butchered without any CAP or what happened exactly ?

If this is just an opportunity lost, another one will come. If you lost assets, that's worse.

Not sure whether mustering that amount of fighters over a base in a way that it is hit by strategic bombing anyway will be possible in your game (one probably needs a plan for that), but I have been learning during the last day or so that 300+ fighters -even mediocre ones- can hurt even B29 strikes badly. I think this will not only be true for anthishipping missions.

Perhaps there are other ways to convince Dan strategic bombing is not the answer to his problems than the op which did not go according to plan...

Hartwig

[John 3rd]

While I ruminate on the partial miscarry of Operation Shimikaze (plan on there being ANOTHER one) I got great news from the area of Aircraft Research.

FROM: 
Gumma Fighter Research Division
Mitori Hasaka, Director

TO: 
Imperial High Command

RE:  Frank Production

May it please the Emperor and the War Council I have the humble honor of informing you that the Japanese aircraft industry will be able to begin producing the Frank one month EARLIER then anticipated.   Current factory production is slated for nearly 300 a month.  Production will be increased even more quickly due to the planned conversion of Tojo Factories which are currently producing over 150 of these planes each month.  In short, the Home Islands should be able to upgrade their current fighters at a pace of nearly 500 planes per month.

Humbly Submitted,

Mitori Hasaka

[John 3rd]

FROM: 
Gumma Bomber Research Division
Kalahara Mitsuo, Director

TO: 
Imperial High Command

RE:  Peggy Production

Having just read the auspitious news regarding the early delivery of the Frank, I would like to humble add the following note to my Co-Director's news.  Peggy production shall start, as promised, at the beginning of July.  We currently can produce 123 Peggy with the new Factory as well as add 90 more airframes once the two Helen plants are re-tooled.  Since the Peggy carries a Torpedo we know how much value the High Command places on it rapid introduction to the combat theatres. 

With Great Humbleness,


Kalahara Mitsuo, Director

[John 3rd]

Combat Report
June 22, 1944
Operation Shimakaze

Synopsis of Action:

Raid One
(from Pagan) 56 A6M3a and 119 Helen/Sally versus 34 Hellcats/Corsairs

The Zeros are flown by pilots skilled in their 70s and ti shows within the fighting.  While 19 Zeros fall they take 6 Hellcats and keep ALL the CAP off of their charges.  The bombers are met with an absolute HELL of AA from the island.  This, of course, is made possible by having over 25 units (strength 150,000 men) sitting there!  Regardless of practicality--the Bombers drop their loads on the northern AF and depart.  They lose 26 bombers while on their run from 10,000 Ft.  Moderate damage is done to the AF.

Raid Two
(from Saipan)  53 A6M3a, 67 Betty, and 168 Frances bore in about 10 minutes after the first raid.  They are opposed by 28 Fighters.  These fighters manage to keep most of the CAP off of their charges too.  The Betty and half of the Frances drop their bombs on the southern AF causing depressingly light damage.  The remainder of the Frances attack the shipping disbanded in the impossible-to-have Port of Iwo Jima.  The CVE Corrigidor get a lot of attention as does an SS, 2 LCT, and an AVD.  When the raid depart for home they tally the loss of 13 Zero and 14 bombers.

Decoy 1
A MSW is nailed by 8 F, 30 DB, and 2 Liberators as it blazes past Cuichi JIma.  IT sinks.

Decoy 2
Three Japanese DDs are attacked by 60 P-38 and 11 4EB.  One Japanese tincan takes a single bomb and retures towards Saipan.


From:  Admiral Nagumo Chuicki
TO:  Captain of IJN Kaga

You are hereby relieved of command and ordered to commit Seppuku for the unwarranted decision of refuelling two Destroyers during the night.  This action caused the might of this Carrier Force to NOT be unleashed against helpless American shipping.  What might our strike of 120 Zero, 164 Judy, and 192 Jill/Grace have done with only having to face two dozen American Fighters? 

Admiral Nagumo     

Totals for the Day:
CVE Corregidor, 2 LCT, and an SS sunk.  The Japanese lose 32 Zero, 26 IJA Bombers, and 17 IJN Bombers in exchange for 13 Fighters, 2 4EB, 1 SBD, and 1 Avenger.

It COULD have been so much more...

I HATE THE AI!
 

[Q-Ball]

John, feel your pain. If I had a Yen for every time a CV TF losses ops points to an unwanted refuel......Argh.

[JeffroK]

John,

Posted this (basically) on Dans page as well

I feel that in WITP, trying to co-ordinate too many TF and Airbases into a single action is fraught with danger. It might explain why IRL operations are "overkill", guarantees something will get throuh.

I suppose you have been lucky, half of your CV might have attacked and got their attacks smashed while Dans counterattack could have sunk 2-3 CV.

As it is, it appears your Op failed but with minimal loss except to nerves.
I was looking forward to the action, though I wasnt confidant of an overwhelming victory for you.

Keep going, I feel that while the Allied strength is starting to overpower, you still have good chances to make him pay dearly for his succeses.

[skrewball]

Hey John, I just got done reading your WHOLE AAR yesterday (Yes I was bored at work [:D]). I was looking forward to this operation and it sucks to be sidelined by game mismanagement.
 
Question though, was your TF set to Refueling Ok? If you turn that off does it stop DDs from fueling from you carriers?

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: skrewball

Hey John, I just got done reading your WHOLE AAR yesterday (Yes I was bored at work [:D]). I was looking forward to this operation and it sucks to be sidelined by game mismanagement.

Question though, was your TF set to Refueling Ok? If you turn that off does it stop DDs from fueling from you carriers?

no it does not! You can do nothing about your ships being refuelled at sea. You can minimize this risk though, order to refuel them one turn before you order your TF to do the full speed move. That way, I had never refuel them when they shouldn´t.

[skrewball]

Is this being addressed in AE?