Matrix Games Forums

The Buffaloes would have been deadly against the Nells and Bettys. You know the Finns used Buffaloes to very good effect. They were also capable of assisting and were in fact on standby, but as it has already been mentioned Adm "I don't know anything about airpower" Phillips never requested fighter cover. It was only after the damage was done that CPT Tennant (who also slipped because he didn't do this earlier) found out that there had been NO request for fighter support from Adm Phillips. So he asked for it, but it was already too late. The Buffaloes arrived over the area after the ships had gone down and there is a story about "hand waving" which was misinterpreted by the pilots. The fact that the northern airfields were abandoned had no effect on this action because Force Z had already withdrawn southward and from where the Bufalloes were, they could easily have supported force Z and there would have been a different ending to this.

This is why I am always harassing Jeremy about keeping all the British air groups in Singapore in the 1941 start campaigns of PacWar. The British had air groups on the other Malay air fields, but no, in PacWar they are all sitting in Singapore waiting to be slaughtered.

Mdhiel your the a/c specs expert, so correct me if Im wrong, but I believe zeros and possibley even Oscars useing fuel conservation flying techniques could cover most of the Bay of Bengal from Rangoon and or the Adaman Islands. So while, even Fulmers could probably drive off Bettys and Nells they most likely would have been shredded if escorted by Zeros and Oscars.

They could not cover most of the Bay of Bengal from Rangoon. They could from the Andaman Islands, had there been an airstrip there. If Japan takes the Andamans, the Zekes have range enough to fly cover along the NE 1/4 of India, but at the limit of their range. Facing UK lba, you'd have a situation comparable to the Guadalcanal vs. Rabaul situation, except that the UK would have a dozen airstrips in comparison with Cactus' two airstrips.

The Fulmars would have been meat against the Zero. The Oscar, on the other hand, is a tough call. Wonderfully fast and maneuverable, *flimsier* than the zero, and armed with two rifle caliber popguns initially. A fulmar could take much more punishment than an Oscar could quickly dish out. It's a mystery to me why the Japanese built it... until you consider how cruddy the Chinese AF was. Anyhow: Oscars vs. Fulmars -- it's like an epic struggle among fleas, and I would not want to have been in either plane.

Let's see, there were no Zekes in the attack vs POW and Repulse. Any kind of fighter cover... fulmars, F2s, Hurricanes, even D XXIs might have made a big difference. It sort of misses the point, though. POW and Repulse Should not have been there at all. And ground reinforcements should never have been sent to Singapore, given that the only reason to *have* Singapore was as a naval base, and after 10 December there was no RN to speak of stationed in Singapore.

The Buffalo, fer cryin' out loud!

Yeah. Go figure. Still PW allows people to swap out airplane types. So, as soon as I have determined the opponent's strategic intentions, the RN gets F4Fs if it looks like Japan is heading into the Bay of Bengal. A perfectly reasonable and plausible course of action, given that in the face of a real threat to India, the UK and US would have significantly enhanced Allied assets in theater.

Originally posted by Ranger-75
The Buffaloes would have been deadly against the Nells and Bettys. You know the Finns used Buffaloes to very good effect. They were also capable of assisting and were in fact on standby, but as it has already been mentioned Adm "I don't know anything about airpower" Phillips never requested fighter cover. It was only after the damage was done that CPT Tennant (who also slipped because he didn't do this earlier) found out that there had been NO request for fighter support from Adm Phillips. So he asked for it, but it was already too late. The Buffaloes arrived over the area after the ships had gone down and there is a story about "hand waving" which was misinterpreted by the pilots. The fact that the northern airfields were abandoned had no effect on this action because Force Z had already withdrawn southward and from where the Bufalloes were, they could easily have supported force Z and there would have been a different ending to this.

This is why I am always harassing Jeremy about keeping all the British air groups in Singapore in the 1941 start campaigns of PacWar. The British had air groups on the other Malay air fields, but no, in PacWar they are all sitting in Singapore waiting to be slaughtered.

I agree, that had the Buffs been sent as soon as Force Z had been spotted, they would have made a difference. I beg to differ that the norhtern airfields had no effect. Force Z was attacked about 50 miles SE of Kuantan Airfield. It was nearly 200 miles from Singapore. Had Kuantan AF not been abandoned then fighter support could have been sent almost instantaneously. In any case had the northern AF not been abandoned then it would have at least been possible to provide continual CAP to Force Z. Something that would have been extremely difficult from far off Singapore.

Regarding Malay AF, Matrix has already stated that the Northern Malaya AF will be included in WITP.

BTW. Just for chucks I started again a PW campaign (v1.2) against the AI. Japan made a strong move into the Bay of Bengal, taking the Andamans after I rather obligingly built for them a level 5 AF. Their next destination was Ceylon. What followed was an extensive attrition campaign, with KB's air assets slowly ground down against mid sixties EXP RAF Hurricanes. When things became desperate, the AVG moved into Colombo, and Kido Butai's losses mounted. At times, "strategic isolation" set in, but I threw every piece of floating metal (not much) in the way of the IJN. Yamato got into an engagement with 3 of the old R-Class, who had the advantage of surprise. Everything barely floated away (well, the UK lost several DDs) but all was f__ked up. Yamato went home for repairs. The UK ships mostly got recalled off map.

In the SoPac, since the IJN CVs were away, the USN played. I took Shortland as soon as the Japanese built a level 3 a/f. The Canal and Rennell Is were occupied and a/f built there, and a huge attrition battle has started with Shortland playing the role historically played by Guadalcanal. Allied troops crossed the Stanleys to assail Buna. The Tarawa invasion was a cake walk because there were no troops in Tarawa, and because the IJN was still goofing around in the Bay of Bengal. Finally the IJN returned to the Pacific.

With the exit of Kido Butai, the Japanese campaign on Ceylon stalled. The 4 crack infantry divisions assailing Trincomalee could not overcome the resistence of the two Brit (one of which was a crack Brit division) and one Indian division there, and local fighters and A20s made provisioning the Japanese expeditionary force impossible. The IJA sent in their last division from the Andamans, only to lose the Andamans to a highly speculative, shoestring assault launched from Dacca. The net result will be the loss of 4 excellent IJA divisions as they starve to death in Ceylon.

Surprisingly hair raising, and even more surprising that the model produced what IMO is the correct basic result. The current date is roughly third week of October 1942.

Originally posted by mdiehl
BTW. Just for chucks I started again a PW campaign (v1.2) against the AI. Japan made a strong move into the Bay of Bengal, taking the Andamans after I rather obligingly built for them a level 5 AF. Their next destination was Ceylon. What followed was an extensive attrition campaign, with KB's air assets slowly ground down against mid sixties EXP RAF Hurricanes. When things became desperate, the AVG moved into Colombo, and Kido Butai's losses mounted. At times, "strategic isolation" set in, but I threw every piece of floating metal (not much) in the way of the IJN. Yamato got into an engagement with 3 of the old R-Class, who had the advantage of surprise. Everything barely floated away (well, the UK lost several DDs) but all was f__ked up. Yamato went home for repairs. The UK ships mostly got recalled off map.

In the SoPac, since the IJN CVs were away, the USN played. I took Shortland as soon as the Japanese built a level 3 a/f. The Canal and Rennell Is were occupied and a/f built there, and a huge attrition battle has started with Shortland playing the role historically played by Guadalcanal. Allied troops crossed the Stanleys to assail Buna. The Tarawa invasion was a cake walk because there were no troops in Tarawa, and because the IJN was still goofing around in the Bay of Bengal. Finally the IJN returned to the Pacific.

With the exit of Kido Butai, the Japanese campaign on Ceylon stalled. The 4 crack infantry divisions assailing Trincomalee could not overcome the resistence of the two Brit (one of which was a crack Brit division) and one Indian division there, and local fighters and A20s made provisioning the Japanese expeditionary force impossible. The IJA sent in their last division from the Andamans, only to lose the Andamans to a highly speculative, shoestring assault launched from Dacca. The net result will be the loss of 4 excellent IJA divisions as they starve to death in Ceylon.

Surprisingly hair raising, and even more surprising that the model produced what IMO is the correct basic result. The current date is roughly third week of October 1942.

Just curious. When did the AI start its campaign in the Bay of Bengal?

Just for kicks you might want to try it playing the Japanese against the Allied AI and see if the results are any different.

IIRC they started the campaign into the Bay of Bengal in April '42.

No need to replay it, though. I've taken out India against the Allied AI. I had a very easy time of it. The Allied AI was insufficiently aggressive in defense, the Allied troops offered not the slightest resistence on the ground, and I never had difficulty finding tranports and container ships enough to do the job.

Originally posted by mdiehl
IIRC they started the campaign into the Bay of Bengal in April '42.

No need to replay it, though. I've taken out India against the Allied AI. I had a very easy time of it. The Allied AI was insufficiently aggressive in defense, the Allied troops offered not the slightest resistence on the ground, and I never had difficulty finding tranports and container ships enough to do the job.

I dont know about the AI agressiveness, but if UV is any indication I think you are going to find that it will be substantionally more difficult to find the shipping in WitP. Logistics are a strong point in UV and Im sure players are going to limited to historical shipping capacities in WitP. I would guess its going to be difficult but possible to pull off the India option, abeit while sacrificesing other theaters.

I'm looking forward to it. For me the most enjoyable part, as the Allied player in PW, is 1942. The challenges are the greatest and the forces at your disposal are the most meager. PW would probably fill my needs into perpetuity but that it does not run well on windows, and there are some gnatty details that make it unplayable against a human. The chief ones being that almost any form of resistence in a CV engagement favored the Japanese. There was no point in risking Allied CVs, because sans a "surprise air strike" (which was rare), the result was usually a 1-sided IJN victory. Most ahistorical.

In my PW invasion of India, I was surprised at the speed with which a few Japanese divisions could route SEAC ground forces. It was almost Borg-like ... "resistence is useless." As to aggressiveness, basically I caught Eastern Fleet in port several times. I don't think the UK CVs even sortied. UK CVs vs. Kido Butai might indeed have been futile resistence, but teh AI should at least have attempted to go down fighting and maybe score a lucky surprise attack.

I don't know how UV's ground combat routines work. I think, though, that in coastal plains or other terrain where there is substantial open ground, the combat contribution of AFV ought to be magnified. Of course that would likely help the Allies since they have more tanks, but it would prevent a cake-walk like my invasion of India.

Originally posted by mdiehl
UK CVs vs. Kido Butai might indeed have been futile resistence

WARNING: The Surgeon General has determined that reading the following post may cause your head to spin around and explode.

I know I've been pretty down on the FAA in this thread, and IMO with good reason. But truth be told, the Brits do have a chance, even against Kido Butai. Even in early 1942. Yes, even with Fulmars. Not a great chance, but a chance to at least do some damage on their way down. How do the Brits spell relief? A - S - V.

Some of those quaint little biplane torpedo bombers carried a reasonably effective surface-search radar, allowing them to fly and fight at night. Not as well as in daylight, but much better than anybody else at the time. With a little luck, the Brits might be able to run in and launch a night attack on Kido Butai. With no CAP and little if any effective AAA fire to worry about, the torpedo bombers would have a field day (field night?). Best case, look for one or two IJN CVs sunk outright, and maybe two or three damaged more or less severely. Anything less and the RN CVs would be toast the next morning, but at least this way they might get some licks in. Too bad it's not modeled in PW.

Hello...

Although I do not usually engage in such public discourse, I feel inspired today. I too, often chose to attack India in PacWar as a strategy to put the British out of the war early, so as to only have one front with which to deal. Because the map edge ended at Dacca, it was not too difficult to dominate India with Bettys and Nells and capture the few bases on map.

With War in the Pacific, as can be seen by the attached screen capture, a much larger potion of India in included. The map edge is found north of Karachi. The screen save shows Dacca to the lower left hand side of the map and the extended range circle of some Wellington bombers in Karachi.

With more to capture and garrison, it might be more difficult to put the British out of the war by March of 1942.

As one of the few who have actually played WIP, to date, I would suggest battling north to Rangoon and placing a greater emphasis of force on the Malay, Dutch Indies, New Britain, the Philippines and the Solomons. Malay and the Dutch Indies contain needed resources. The Philippines must be taken as they dominate the China Sea and isolating Australia could prove to be more useful, in the long run, than an extended battle of attrition in India. A defensive ring could be slowly built and expanded. The wider the ring, of course, the more difficulties the player will have with supply and fuel issues.

I mention attrition, because unlike PacWar, WIP requires much more long range planning. If you capture a base in WIP, the automatic supply routines will not rush 20,000 tons of supply to the base on the next turn. It will take a couple weeks for you to get supplies to the location from one of the primary supply sources. This changes the complexion of theater strategies and feel of the game. The player must develop a line of main bases that receive supply from the primary supply sources and from these supply must be sent to forward bases. Torpedoes and mines can only be reloaded from a size nine port (the torpedo and mine depots) or from submarine tenders, patrol torpedo boat tenders, destroyer tenders and mine layer tenders, as appropriate for ship type. The former would most likely be part of the main base line and the latter stationed at the forward bases.

In addition, land based units must have a target specified to be completely effective and it takes some weeks for the unit to reach 100% effectiveness, as it prepares to attack or defend the assigned target. Location at a base of adequate size, plenty of supply and in the case of attack orders, recon missions over the target speed the process. Ad hoc attacks are possible, but the troops will not do so well as when the attack is carefully planned.

As the Japanese player you will have to deal with the British, Dutch, Canadians, Americans, Australians, New Zealanders, Mexicans, Communist and Nationalist Chinese and the Soviet Union and will have to be careful not to spread yourselves to thinly. Although you will start the war with an advantage in aircraft, crews, troops, supply, ships and the like, the Allies will, by the end of the first year, have an every increasing advantage in all matters.

Got to go back to programming...

Michael Wood
Lead Programmer,
Matrix Games

Hi

Thanks Mike for that post. It was interesting reading.

In PAC WAR I pushed my foces as far as I could in the India/Burma theater and stopped when they faced a superior foe. In WITP I guess I will still look at that theater the same way but since the map is so much bigger I'm gonna send more troops to hold the line.

To take the areas mentioned by Mike is far more important and the USN/U.S. Army/USAF a far more dangerous foe.

Well thats how I look at it.....

Dan

Hello Mike, thanks for the informative post. Just wondering though, does capturing Indian Bases have any effect on Chinese supplies? Because if it doesnt then I really dont see any legitmate reason to attack India at all. IMHO China should have its own indigenous supply, but it should be relatively low, so as to emphasize the importance of keeping the Burma road and the Hump supply routes open. That way the allied player would have to expend at least some effort to keep China supplied.

P.S. Nice map, I especially like that land bridge connecting Ceylon to the mainland.

Mike -

Thanks for the interesting comments and screen cap. Regarding the screen cap, I noticed that Dacca was listed as having "zero" value for either the Allies or the Japanese. Is that just something that you folks haven't filled in yet, or is that going to be a change from UV.

Thanks -

Dave Baranyi

WARNING: The Surgeon General has determined that reading the following post may cause your head to spin around and explode.

I know I've been pretty down on the FAA in this thread, and IMO with good reason. But truth be told, the Brits do have a chance, even against Kido Butai. Even in early 1942. Yes, even with Fulmars. Not a great chance, but a chance to at least do some damage on their way down. How do the Brits spell relief? A - S - V.

Some of those quaint little biplane torpedo bombers carried a reasonably effective surface-search radar, allowing them to fly and fight at night. Not as well as in daylight, but much better than anybody else at the time. With a little luck, the Brits might be able to run in and launch a night attack on Kido Butai. With no CAP and little if any effective AAA fire to worry about, the torpedo bombers would have a field day (field night?). Best case, look for one or two IJN CVs sunk outright, and maybe two or three damaged more or less severely. Anything less and the RN CVs would be toast the next morning, but at least this way they might get some licks in. Too bad it's not modeled in PW.

I'm cool with all that and agree that in the real world a couple of Illustrious are far more dangerous than PW accounted them. Quite apart from the radar, *if* they could launch a surprise airstrike a la Midway on a Kido Butai tied up in the same kind of situation (mission creep, like having to simultaneously provide CAP for an invasino force, suppress Commonwealth airfields in the tactical area, and guard against any move by the Royal Navy), then Eastern Fleet could *in real life* hand Kido Butai it's collective head on the end of its own sword. PW does not model that, however, and reading the AARs from UV (where IJN CAPs are huge and strikes seem routinely well coordinated, while Allied CV groups can't coordinate the distribution of coffee to the bridge), I have my concerns for the future.

Posted by Mdiehl

PW does not model that, however, and reading the AARs from UV (where IJN CAPs are huge and strikes seem routinely well coordinated, while Allied CV groups can't coordinate the distribution of coffee to the bridge), I have my concerns for the future.

Don't believe everything you read in the AAR's.

The incidence of huge IJN CAP that you see in AAR's is actually deceptive. It represents all aircraft available for CAP. It does not represent the number of aircraft that make the intercept. Even on a clear day, you never get anything like a full intercept. The USN CAP will be more efficient due to radar warning. Once the radar equipped USN CV's receive their full compliment of fighters (36 by about July), 4 USN CV's can intercept the same number of incoming aircraft as 6 IJN CV's.

The large number of IJN CAP fighters that appear in AAR's is often from player choice (they're free to assign as many as they want - just as the Allied player is). There is also no restriction on adding extra fighters, in place of bombers, on CV's. Many players swear by this as extra insurance (the IJN has a lot of land based zero squadrons like the Tainan group that often find themselves part of Kido Butai). Later, you'll often see USN CV's packed with Marine Corsair squadrons, the deadliest fighter in the game.

In terms of strike co-ordination, I think the game gets it down fairly well, except just a bit to extreme in its application. You'll probably disagree but I would say the historical IJN carrier strikes in '42 tended to get more of their strike aircraft (as a group) to the target than the USN did. I think the real problem with the strike modeling is in 2 area's.

1) Only the more experienced IJN airgroups had any success in staying together. The lesser experienced one's didn't. UV tends to allow the IJN to have this ability regardless of experience. Also, the USN still seems to launch unco-ordinated strikes even when it's later in the game and they're more experienced.

2) Historically, small groups of USN a/c (not part of one large, co-ordinated attack) proved to be capable of inflicting heavy damage despite their numbers. Even pairs of CV scout bombers did it on occasion. The game should give some form of bonus chance to small, unsighted groups of aircraft who often were able to attack while dealing with little or no CAP and flak. The larger the strike group, the less chance they should have of this bonus. USN radar would mean the IJN would have a far smaller chance of this happening.

Originally posted by mdiehl


I'm cool with all that and agree that in the real world a couple of Illustrious are far more dangerous than PW accounted them. Quite apart from the radar, *if* they could launch a surprise airstrike a la Midway on a Kido Butai tied up in the same kind of situation (mission creep, like having to simultaneously provide CAP for an invasino force, suppress Commonwealth airfields in the tactical area, and guard against any move by the Royal Navy), then Eastern Fleet could *in real life* hand Kido Butai it's collective head on the end of its own sword. PW does not model that, however, and reading the AARs from UV (where IJN CAPs are huge and strikes seem routinely well coordinated, while Allied CV groups can't coordinate the distribution of coffee to the bridge), I have my concerns for the future.

Whoa! Mdiehl, lets not get too carried away. Sea Hurricans and swordfish had about half the range of IJN aircraft. That realistically limits any eastern fleet attack to a handful of Albacores and Fulmers. Albacores were so bad that they were retired before the plane that it was suppose to replace the swordfish. Fulmers made buffaloes look like world beaters. British Carriers had no divebombers in 42 so any attack would be one dementional on the deck. Any resemblance to Midway would most likely be that the Albacores would suffer the same fate as the USN Devasters in that battle.

By the way, your wrong about UV, you may want to reserve judgement on that game until you play it for yourself. Its been my experience, that the few lopsided results are player related not game related.

Whoa! Mdiehl, lets not get too carried away. Sea Hurricans and swordfish had about half the range of IJN aircraft. That realistically limits any eastern fleet attack to a handful of Albacores and Fulmers. Albacores were so bad that they were retired before the plane that it was suppose to replace the swordfish. Fulmers made buffaloes look like world beaters. British Carriers had no divebombers in 42 so any attack would be one dementional on the deck. Any resemblance to Midway would most likely be that the Albacores would suffer the same fate as the USN Devasters in that battle.

By the way, your wrong about UV, you may want to reserve judgement on that game until you play it for yourself. Its been my experience, that the few lopsided results are player related not game related.

I'll purchase UV (maybe) when (1) there's no pressing need for yet another "patch," and (2) I'm convinced that the combat model is historically correct. Some of this I judge by results (trying to see past player error, which is not always easy), and by details (like the arbitrary choice to make IJA squads inherently better at anti-tank -- they weren't), and some by "what's allowed." Letting players mess with the inherent air doctrine of CVs such that both players are operating CVs with the American's historical November 44 load out (half or more of fighters) is a flaw, IMO. Of course, if WitP comes out before UV is repaired, it will certainly save me the extra expense.

The "Midway at Colombo" is not a carry away. Not *likely* IMO but quite possible. One can envisage many reasons why mission creep would so overtax Kido Butai that even a squadron of Stringbags could sneak in and lay waste to several CVs. As to the range thing. KB's aircraft had roughly double the nominal range of US a/c as well, at least in fighters. Historically, though, launching a "very long range" airstrike from IJN CVs against *naval* targets just did not happen (another "that don't bark" test for UV and even PW). The targets had too great a probability of moving well away from the observation area if you used the IJN a/c at their longer ranges, so most engagements occured at less than 250 miles.

Make it a night raid by stringbags and there's little that the IJN can do to stop it, other than hoping the torpedoes will all miss.

Originally posted by mdiehl


I'll purchase UV (maybe) when (1) there's no pressing need for yet another "patch," and (2) I'm convinced that the combat model is historically correct. Some of this I judge by results (trying to see past player error, which is not always easy), and by details (like the arbitrary choice to make IJA squads inherently better at anti-tank -- they weren't), and some by "what's allowed." Letting players mess with the inherent air doctrine of CVs such that both players are operating CVs with the American's historical November 44 load out (half or more of fighters) is a flaw, IMO. Of course, if WitP comes out before UV is repaired, it will certainly save me the extra expense.

.

Well maybe someday in the future someone will make your "perfect" game. My guess is you wont see it in your lifetime. You have been so active on the UV forum I took it for granted that you actually had the game. You know which engine WITP will be based on?:)

Let me be honest and say that UV is the best wargaming experience I've had. I strongly recommend you to try it.

Dan

Game doesn't have to be perfect. It can be pretty good by getting the historical facts right. I have paid out *plenty* of money for PTO games (PTO, Empire of the Rising Sun (AH), PzGeneral III, Gary Grigsby's Pacific War [SSI], Rising Sun [Talonsoft], ASL modules [AH/MMP], Victory in the Pacific [AH], Flat Top [Yaq/AH], Carrier Battles [Rising Sun Sims], Pacific War [VG], Salvo [3W, IIRC, a pos if ever one was written], SOPAC [Avalanche], and Banzai [AH add on module to Up Front]).

Some of these are pretty good (Carrier Battles, Flat Top, the ASL titles), some good but need improvement (PTO, GGPW), some apparently good but basically unplayable (PW by VG), some are great beer and pretzel's games but do not warrant the nom "simulation" and might as well be called "The Ahistorical Wargame of Planet X" (ERS, VitP, Banzai), and some are crap.

No need for me to shell out more money to once again be subject to unfounded mythmaking, like the F4F vs. A6M thing that has been decisively "won" by myself. No need to buy a game where for some reason the IJA squads have some magically superior AT capability even though they manifestly lacked any intrinsic AT weapon. No need to hear *again* the unsubstantiated claim that IJN CV CAC/CAP and airstrikes were on the whole better coordinated than Allied ones. No need *again* to buy a game where the choice for the Allies in 1942 is "resist and die in a series of 1-sided defeats in 1942" (I mean ahistorically -- the frequency with which Australia or India are invaded, which ought to be less often than 1 in 100 games, or the frequency with which Port Moresby can be invaded despite the presence of plenty of lba tactical a/c at PM or in NE Australia) or "skulk in the rear area and wait until you have overwhelming CV superiority."

Alas, I know WitP will be based on the UV engine. That's why I'm so actively critical of some of the obvious BS built into the UV engine, and why I won't (probably) pay for UV. Why pay for the same game twice?

Posted by Mdiehl

No need for me to shell out more money to once again be subject to unfounded mythmaking, like the F4F vs. A6M thing that has been decisively "won" by myself. No need to buy a game where for some reason the IJA squads have some magically superior AT capability even though they manifestly lacked any intrinsic AT weapon. No need to hear *again* the unsubstantiated claim that IJN CV CAC/CAP and airstrikes were on the whole better coordinated than Allied ones. No need *again* to buy a game where the choice for the Allies in 1942 is "resist and die in a series of 1-sided defeats in 1942" (I mean ahistorically -- the frequency with which Australia or India are invaded, which ought to be less often than 1 in 100 games, or the frequency with which Port Moresby can be invaded despite the presence of plenty of lba tactical a/c at PM or in NE Australia) or "skulk in the rear area and wait until you have overwhelming CV superiority."

Dont be shy mate, tell us how you really feel.

I've purchased a horde of PC and boargames dealing with the POT over the years as well and UV is a standout (even if it has its flaws). I think you're doing yourself a disservice but its your money.

I don't understand your focus on the AT issue as a major flaw of the game. Matrix have not stated why the IJA squads have it and what it represents. It could be there to represent something completely different. It has very little impact anyway (I'd say none) in the game as the land battles are won by infantry, engineers, good supply and to some extent suppresion by bombardment. I dont recall anyone mentioning winning or losing by the performance of their armour.

I do agree that the F4F suffers far worse than historically against the A6m but unfortunately its just the way the speed and manueverabilty ratings translate via the combat engine (the same way the F4U can rack up regular 10 to 1 kill ratio's despite being outnumbered more than 2 to 1 by vastly more experienced IJN pilots in A6m's). The F4F's poor results v the A6m is not a major game issue as it's primary role is to keep the enemy fighters away from friendly bombers and to shoot down attacking bombers. It does the first adequately and the second quite well. Even if you gave it your "historical" parity with the A6m, it would not make a critical difference to the airstrike results.

The degree of the F4F's inferiority is as wrong as the F4U's superiority but you just have to wear it. And before you leap to the defence of the F4U, I'm talking about it getting its kill ratio in completely adverse, non historical conditions (ie 60 top IJN leaders and pilots vs 18 USN pilots with average exp and an average leader - from a test I ran several times to determine how good the F4U was in UV). IMO, the appearance of the first F4U's in Feb '43 is the beginning of the end for the IJN fighters in the sector.

I hope you find WitP to your liking but I cant see any difference in the area's you mention from UV.