Matrix Games Forums

Radar that detects aircraft, allows you to scramble a higher percentage of fighters that might be at the base, or on the ship. If you CAP is 30%, you'll generally have about 25 - 35% of your fighters up, as ordered. But with radar (and to much less effective extent, sound detection devices) you can "roll" to try and scramble the other 70% of your fighters before the enemy strike gets there. They have to "climb to alititude", so it might not make a lot of difference in your ability to KILL enemy aircraft, but the other positivie is that, at least they're not stuck on the ground (getting bombed).

Surface radar helps you to detect ships. It generally affects who spots who in surface combat, and who is surprised etc. It's no guarentee (evidence historically Savo Island), but it helps.

-F-

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

Well one response to that question would be, it is my game, if they have the asset and it works, I will decide how to use it, doesnt matter what the Japanese did historicly.

Two points--first, we haven't established that the radar did work historically. Second, that atitiude is fine if you are playing Japan against the AI, or a human who agrees to let you use the ships as you will, but if I'm playing the AI or a human as the Allies, I don't want Japan to have an ahistorical capability.

On a related subject, even if the radar sets were operational, it is exceedingly doubtful that the Japanese admirals would have had the foresight to attach these ships to their carrier groups. Neither the US nor Japan fully grasped the possibilities of radar until the middle of the war, and even to the end of the war there were hidebound officers on both sides who didn't trust the new technology.

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Radar that detects aircraft, allows you to scramble a higher percentage of fighters that might be at the base, or on the ship. If you CAP is 30%, you'll generally have about 25 - 35% of your fighters up, as ordered. But with radar (and to much less effective extent, sound detection devices) you can "roll" to try and scramble the other 70% of your fighters before the enemy strike gets there. They have to "climb to alititude", so it might not make a lot of difference in your ability to KILL enemy aircraft, but the other positivie is that, at least they're not stuck on the ground (getting bombed).

The Chinese were able to achieve a similar effect with a primitive yet elaborate network of spotters.

ORIGINAL: V2

Also, gents, the Natsushio (DD Kagero Class) has radar. I discovered this in Feb 1942 in Scenario 16. Don't know if she began the scenario with it. After an exhaustive search, I found that no other DD's have radar as of Feb '42.

Not anymore [;)] as of 1.3

So Spitfire.... I assume when you play the Japanese you dont send troops to other bases to invade on the first turn, you dont use the 1st turn "cheat" to land troops in Borneo or else where that historicly didnt and wouldnt have happened.

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng

I had similar questions about Kitikami and Oi since I read that they were with the heavies at Midway. It seemed odd to say the least. Imo, the best place for a radar is on a DD away from your carriers along the threat axis, not on the carriers themselves.

Possibly you are thinking in modern terms about maintaining EMCON (Emission control, or keeping active sensors turned off). This was not necessary during WWII--detection systems weren't sophisticated enough to provide precise targeting information. That is, there was no advantage to having one ship turn off its radar if there was another ship in the TF with radar on (except in rare cases where one set was known to be harder to detect.

Or perhaps your idea is to have the radar closer to the threat for earlier warning--the problem with that theory is that any advantage of being closer to the enemy will be more than canceled by the DD's shorter radar horizon, unless you form a separate picket task force and put it way out--but the game doesn't model situations like this very well.

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

So Spitfire.... I assume when you play the Japanese you dont send troops to other bases to invade on the first turn, you dont use the 1st turn "cheat" to land troops in Borneo or else where that historicly didnt and wouldnt have happened.

First of all, I hardly ever play the Japanese (in fact I haven't played them yet in WitP--sadly, I've hardly had time to play at all as I'm so busy with school and work [:(]) Whichever side I'm playing, I try insofar as possible to play "realistically"--not taking advantage of rules loopholes or the computer's ineptitude. The one exception is when I want to try something totally ahistorical simply as a "what if." And when I do do that, it's usually one ahistorical thing at a time that I try, and not a bunch all at once.

As I said, it's fine if you want to play that way--if it floats your boat, next time you play the Japanese, use the editor to add 10 Shokakus to the Japanese OOB. My point was that the database should reflect historical reality as far as reasonably possible--if anyone wants to alter it from there, that's fine, but the "base" database (no pun intended) should be as realistic as possible. And if Kitakami's and Oi's radar sets were hardly operational during the first year of the war, then they should not have radar capability to start with in the official, historical database.

Well I strongly advice you not to plat PBEM with most of the people on this board that play Japanese, as they definetely stretch the reality factor,using the excuse, that since they arent playing a historic recreation it is their choice how to use that first turn, most strike at bases deep in allied territory that no sane Japanese commander would have been able to get to on December 7 by using the first turn ( cheat) and justify with the excuse that they arent constrained to historicly movements.

At the same time most of them make restrictive house rules on what the allied player CANT do on the first turn, to more easily get that "suprise" they want.

But back to the point. If the cruisers had operational Radar and it appears they did, just because the Japanese leadership didnt understand its importance, doesnt mean that you as the player cant take advantage of its importance. That is no where near as "gamey" as some peoples first turn moves.

I havent played the Japanese yet either by the way.

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

Well I strongly advice you not to plat PBEM with most of the people on this board that play Japanese, as they definetely stretch the reality factor,using the excuse, that since they arent playing a historic recreation it is their choice how to use that first turn, most strike at bases deep in allied territory that no sane Japanese commander would have been able to get to on December 7 by using the first turn ( cheat) and justify with the excuse that they arent constrained to historicly movements.

I'll take that under advisement; sadly, I doubt I'll have the time to commit to a PBEM game anytime soon [possibly next summer], so for the time being, when I do have time to play, it will have to be against the computer.

At the same time most of them make restrictive house rules on what the allied player CANT do on the first turn, to more easily get that "suprise" they want.

Thanks--I'll be sure to discuss that with any potential opponents. BTW, every game I've started so far (two or three, then started over--still learning), I've just used "historical first turn." I take it from your comment that there's no way in a two-player game to constrain the Allies to a "historical" first turn while providing the Japanese with the opportunity to change their orders. I might just offer my opponent a simple choice--either use "historical first turn" or else anything is fair game.

I do have to concede, however, that I'm more inclined to allow semi-historical actions that tend to favor the Japanese, as they are so tremendously disadvantaged in the scenarios that go past 1942. My friends and I used to play VG's Pacific War, and we always used the optional rule that the Japanese receive the Tirpitz as a reinforcement in January 1944 if they hold the strategic initiative. I always explained this to anyone who objected, "No, we don't think it's particularly realistic, but the Japanese need all the help they can get."

But back to the point. If the cruisers had operational Radar and it appears they did, just because the Japanese leadership didnt understand its importance, doesnt mean that you as the player cant take advantage of its importance. That is no where near as "gamey" as some peoples first turn moves.

First of all, I haven't seen any evidence that the radar was operational any significant portion of the time--as I mentioned, it could have been down for modification or repairs a lot, and operators might have needed a lot of on-the-job training. In fact, the one source we've seen so far states that it was "experimental." But even if it does turn out that the radar was operationally effective by the end of 1941, this still goes to the issue of whether the Japanese high command could realistically have assigned these units to escort the carriers. Surely the battleship faction would have been up in arms over this. But there's no provision for modeling such political cost in the game. As an analogy, as the Allies, I'd love to have a lot of the ships that were historically in the Atlantic during all or part of 1942 available at the start of that year. But there's no provision for making the Allies pay the political and economic cost of this decision. So I'm not going to edit the database to add all the ships I'd like to have.

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

Well I strongly advice you not to plat PBEM with most of the people on this board that play Japanese, as they definetely stretch the reality factor,using the excuse, that since they arent playing a historic recreation it is their choice how to use that first turn, most strike at bases deep in allied territory that no sane Japanese commander would have been able to get to on December 7 by using the first turn ( cheat) and justify with the excuse that they arent constrained to historicly movements.

At the same time most of them make restrictive house rules on what the allied player CANT do on the first turn, to more easily get that "suprise" they want.

Come on, Twotribes, you can do a better rant than this! [:)]

But back to the point. If the cruisers had operational Radar and it appears they did, just because the Japanese leadership didnt understand its importance, doesnt mean that you as the player cant take advantage of its importance. That is no where near as "gamey" as some peoples first turn moves.

that seems to me to be quite reasonable. The US did not use BBs as bombardment ships for quite a while in the real war, but in the game the OBBs are used for nothing but. Starightjacketing players to historical decisions is a non-starter for both sides. Should the Allied player be forced to wait until December 21st to order the retreat to Bataan, because the then-current doctrine was to fight the Japanese on the beaches (much like the Jpananese doctrine to deploy their radars with the Battle Force?)

I havent played the Japanese yet either by the way.

Then do so, and experience the exquisite pain of knowing that you are gonna lose, and the only question is how badly. The Allied player can afford to be generous - he knows he will win no matter what (auto-victories are only possible for the Japanese against the AI). My view as Allies or Japanese is really pretty simple - I think it is only fair that each player have an equal amount of fun. If the Japanese player insists that the Asiatic Fleet stays around as long as they did historically, then I am okay with that, in spite of losing auxilliaries that historicaly DID stick around.

You have to play both sides to understand either one.

ORIGINAL: SpitfireIX

First of all, I haven't seen any evidence that the radar was operational any significant portion of the time--as I mentioned, it could have been down for modification or repairs a lot, and operators might have needed a lot of on-the-job training. In fact, the one source we've seen so far states that it was "experimental."

True, but many aircraft appear when they were still "experimental." Japanese LCU values are based on what they achieved in spite of the fact that their tactics in 1941 were "experimental." Lacking evidence that the radar sets were not, in fact, operational, i would say the burden is on you.

But even if it does turn out that the radar was operationally effective by the end of 1941, this still goes to the issue of whether the Japanese high command could realistically have assigned these units to escort the carriers.

Not an issue, because I AM the Japanese High Command! [:D]

ORIGINAL: grumbler

ORIGINAL: SpitfireIX

First of all, I haven't seen any evidence that the radar was operational any significant portion of the time--as I mentioned, it could have been down for modification or repairs a lot, and operators might have needed a lot of on-the-job training. In fact, the one source we've seen so far states that it was "experimental."

True, but many aircraft appear when they were still "experimental." Japanese LCU values are based on what they achieved in spite of the fact that their tactics in 1941 were "experimental."

Your analogies are specious. Which aircraft appear while they are still "experimental?" In fact, the P-38 doesn't even begin to arrive until late 1942, when several earlier marks had already been produced by the hundreds and entered service (even in the Pacific theater). The B-29 first flew in 1942, and so did the first Hellcat. The first Avenger flew in the summer of 1941. I could go on and on.

Exactly how were the Japanese tactics "experimental?" Are you possibly alluding to an alleged lack of combat experience? If so, you are forgetting that the IJA had been fighting in China for years. And even if your claim of "experimental" tactics had any merit, to liken the success of untried army units against the even greener, ill-supplied, ill-equipped units the Allies had in the field early in the war to the development of a radical new technology is absurd.

Lacking evidence that the radar sets were not, in fact, operational, i would say the burden is on you.

I have given my evidence--the web page referenced in this thread states that the Type 13 radar was deployed "experimentally" in 1941, but not "operationally" until March 1943.

It further states that the "Oi, Kitagami [sic] " received the Type 13 radar in 1941 "month unknown."

The burden is now on you to either show that a) my evidence is incorrect, or b) that "experimental" radar should have similar capabilities to "operational" radar in game terms. Your two fatuous analogies do nothing to advance your argument.

But even if it does turn out that the radar was operationally effective by the end of 1941, this still goes to the issue of whether the Japanese high command could realistically have assigned these units to escort the carriers.

Not an issue, because I AM the Japanese High Command! [:D]

I reiterate what I told Twotribes: If you want to modify the database to give your favorite side ahistorical advantages, or pursue ahistorical strategies, and your opponent is amenable, knock yourself out. But I'm talking about making the unmodified database as historical as possible.

Furthermore, if you want to argue that as the Japanese high command you can do anything you want, then I will argue that as the Allied Pacific theater commander, I order all units to full alert at 12:30 a.m. Hawaii time on December 7, because I can use my hindsight. I also want to order that all faulty torpedoes be immediately fixed. I'll also argue that I should be able to have free setup, because I could have used my hindsight to reorganize all the Allied forces in the Pacific during November 1941.

Boy, this little cat-fight has is almost interesting.

And FYI

Which aircraft appear while they are still "experimental?"

The Tojos that are based next to Hong Kong on 12-07-41 were "experimental". There is only one sqdn in-game. It did indeed exist historically, even tho it was the only squadron, and was deployed to the China theater for further "refinement". The Tojo was not deployed operationally (throughout the Pacific), until late '42 or early '43 however.

You may now resume your regularly scheduled bickering.

-F-

If I may be so bold, I submit that you guys are going off on tangents. First of all, the employment of radar (whether it was actually effective or not) with the carrier forces was a doctrinal issue. The KB was tasked with finding enemy carriers and had its own search and warning capabilities. The battle line was tasked with finding the enemy battle line. Having the radar-equiped ships with the battle line actually makes more sense than having them with the KB (provided the radar actually worked).

Secondly, there is enough coroborative evidence to argue that neither the Japanese, nor in fact the USN, managed to successfully mate a decent radar set with competent operators with a command structure that could appreciate and use these advantages correctly until well into 1943.

Thus, I think having 2 CLs equpped with radar should really not give the Japanese any great advantage.

ORIGINAL: Onime No Kyo

If I may be so bold, I submit that you guys are going off on tangents

On these boards? Never!
.
.
.
.
I do believe you are correct sir!

-F-

I would like to 'stir the pot' a bit regarding the scenario 15 installation of Type 13 radar on Kitakami and Oi in late 1941.

Without seeing this post I have already mentioned in the OOB comments thread that this radar installation is almost certainly wrong. To summarise type 13 airsearch radar was only developed mid 1943 and fitted from early 1944. It was a more reliable supplement to the Type 21 airsearch set. To support this view see the nakagawa and lacroix and wells books. Nakagawa interviewed many of the radar development technicians - the lacroix and wells book is wellknown for its impecable list of sources. The star-games.com japanese radar website offers no references to support the information presented.

If radar installations are important to the setting of CAP etc on carriers then this oob issue is important - otherwise how are the americans supposed to have the chance to surprise the japanese eg at midway ?

The American airstrikes didn't surprise the Japanese at Midway, they were prepared for the attacks that came from Midway itself, and the American torpedo bombers. The problem was, all the torpedo bombers drew the Japanese fighters down to low altitudes, and then the dive bombers flew in over the top of the CAP.

I guess that in WitP terms, you could say that the torpedo bomber attacks came initially, against "full" CAP, wore out the CAP, as you see in WitP, and then the dive bombers got through against almost no opposition.

I would prefer not to get into a heavy debate on the meaning of surprise re the midway airstrikes.

The usa divebomber attack was able to land bombs on flightdecks covered with rearming aircraft and sundry aircraft munitions. If the japanese had any prior knowledge of attack they would have tried to avoid such a situation ! By contrast the japanese strikes were well spotted in advance by us radar allowing aircraft to flyoff and fuel systems to be drained etc. Airsearch radar allowed this to happen - this option should not be available to the japanese so early in the war.

In game terms on the older dos based pacific war I have seen usa surprise air attacks make all the difference in carrier battles - a nice feature I would like to see repeated in witp. This is why I mentioned the oob issue in the first place.

The problem, as I see it, is that the Japanese admirals have even less appreciation for, or even mistrust of radar than the US admirals did. It was probably thought of as a novelty, and not taken seriously. [:D]

One thing that I always was surprised by was the lack of employment of the Oi and Kitakami with other surface forces in the Solomans. They would have been naturals in the various engagements throughout 1942 and 43. Always seemed like a waste of a valuable asset. Did either ever launch a Long Lance in anger?

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Interesting that the refits gradually reduce the torp battery to zero. Who will allow this refit??? Especially as the second converts it into a kaiten hen. No kaitens in the game.

[&:] I dont see this in the ship database. The torps stay the same with the upgrades.