Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Big B

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

If at normal range, Bettys will attack ships at 200 feet with torpedoes. Altitude assignment doesn't matter.

Chez

Just a side note here, Bettys (and Sallys) attack with torps at normal range, Great! That's what I have seen in all my games - and they torpedo lots of ships all the time...fine.

But why is it then that equivelant allied bombers have to go through no less than 7 checks to have a chance of carrying 1000lb bombs for anti-shipping? That don't seem right.

Not directed at you Chez..

B

Sallies don´t torp![:-]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: Big B

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

If at normal range, Bettys will attack ships at 200 feet with torpedoes. Altitude assignment doesn't matter.

Chez

Just a side note here, Bettys (and Sallys) attack with torps at normal range, Great! That's what I have seen in all my games - and they torpedo lots of ships all the time...fine.

But why is it then that equivelant allied bombers have to go through no less than 7 checks to have a chance of carrying 1000lb bombs for anti-shipping? That don't seem right.

Not directed at you Chez..

B

Sallies don´t torp![:-]

Sallys are G3Ms are they not?

EDIT: OOOPS! I STAND CORRECTED - I REFERED G3Ms SALLY INSTEAD OF NELL

ORIGINAL: Big B

In the games I've played - I don't recall ever seeing Bettys or Sallys attack ships with bombs - always it has been torpedos (probably because my oppenent attacks at normal range).

Put Bettys or Nells on a level 3 airfield. They will use only bombs, no torps.

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

ORIGINAL: Big B

In the games I've played - I don't recall ever seeing Bettys or Sallys attack ships with bombs - always it has been torpedos (probably because my oppenent attacks at normal range).

Put Bettys or Nells on a level 3 airfield. They will use only bombs, no torps.

A level 3 airfield is only fighter strip (though a big fighter strip).
So if I put B-26s on a level 4 airfield or larger (with adequate supply) they will use 1000lbrs for all anti-shipping missions?

Only if they pass the exp/leadership tests too I think.

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Chez,

You said the best accuracy alt is 10,000'. I thought it was 6,000'. Are you sure it's 10k?

-F-

I usually go for 7000 because they should be more accurate than on 10000 and I stay out of lots of AA guns as those usually have a range of 6000. Is this assumption wrong or are there any game mechanics that prevent being overly 'smart'?

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Only if they pass the exp/leadership tests too I think.

Yes - and that is why I pointed out earlier that it seems unfair that G4Ms and G3Ms always attack with torps while allies don't get their big stick.

Maybe the Japanese always pass their exp/leadership die rolls and the allies just don't that often - but if thats the case it seems pretty lame.

Yes - and that is why I pointed out earlier that it seems unfair that G4Ms and G3Ms always attack with torps while allies don't get their big stick.

Hitting a moving target with 1 bomb is tougher then dropping a pattern of bombs and getting a hit. The skill check is for that reason.

Torpedo attacks have their own set of checks coupled with additional "serious" AA penalties.

ORIGINAL: Big B

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Only if they pass the exp/leadership tests too I think.

Yes - and that is why I pointed out earlier that it seems unfair that G4Ms and G3Ms always attack with torps while allies don't get their big stick.

Maybe the Japanese always pass their exp/leadership die rolls and the allies just don't that often - but if thats the case it seems pretty lame.

Standard armament for the Betty is a torp. Standard armament for the Allied LBA is 500lbers. The check performed is to allow Allied LBA to use bigger bombs than their standard armament. As far as I know, Japanese planes do not get that bonus. Keep in mind that you get fewer chances to hit with the 1k and 2k bombs. With IJN damage control as it is, a single 500lb bomb hit can be devastating to all but the high armor ships.

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Yes - and that is why I pointed out earlier that it seems unfair that G4Ms and G3Ms always attack with torps while allies don't get their big stick.

Hitting a moving target with 1 bomb is tougher then dropping a pattern of bombs and getting a hit. The skill check is for that reason.

Torpedo attacks have their own set of checks coupled with additional "serious" AA penalties.

It's not a question of hitting the target - it's a question of getting to take the ordinance on the mission - so if you DO hit it will be worth while.

Your chances for a hit are another matter, and those Japanese bombers do a fine job of hitting with their ONE torp..

I always set my Nells and Bettys to range 15 (Max range to use torps), altitude 15k (they attack in groups of 9 instead of 4 usually) with 30% set to Naval Search. This usually gets a good attack against any enemy TF spotted within range. Sometimes I use range 11 so I am sure the fighters based there can escort as well.

If you want to cover a simple base like 6 hexes away, set the range for 7 hexes and your bombers will cover that base fine and be within figher cover range as well.

For bombing runs, I set them to 10k altitude so they can hit - which they do occaisionally at that altitude. Any lower and my flak loses are greatly increased. IJA LR Bombers are not very good at absorbing flak hits.

Also, sometimes LR Bombers will not fly against targets with heavy CAP without fighter escorts - so that may be part of your problem too.

I agree that the major problem with the Allies using 1k bombs is that it is not their normal loadout compared to IJA LR Bombers designed to carry torps. But I feel the flak penalty at attacking at 200 feet is a good equalizer as it mows up any attacking groups - especially against high AA targets like US CVs and BBs.

Xargun

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng

ORIGINAL: Big B

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Only if they pass the exp/leadership tests too I think.

Yes - and that is why I pointed out earlier that it seems unfair that G4Ms and G3Ms always attack with torps while allies don't get their big stick.

Maybe the Japanese always pass their exp/leadership die rolls and the allies just don't that often - but if thats the case it seems pretty lame.

Standard armament for the Betty is a torp. Standard armament for the Allied LBA is 500lbers. The check performed is to allow Allied LBA to use bigger bombs than their standard armament. As far as I know, Japanese planes do not get that bonus. Keep in mind that you get fewer chances to hit with the 1k and 2k bombs. With IJN damage control as it is, a single 500lb bomb hit can be devastating to all but the high armor ships.

Well the standard bomb for G4Ms and G3Ms are also 500lbrs I believe - it's their anti-shipping armament that is the torp.

Standard bomb load for US bombers is also 500lbrs - but they don't get a standard alternate anti-shipping loadout like the Japanese do..

So it depends on how you look at it. As a Japanese player would you want your Bettys to rarely get to use a torpedo - although they have a theoretical chance to get one?

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng

With IJN damage control as it is, a single 500lb bomb hit can be devastating to all but the high armor ships.

Tell me about it.[:(]

I get SBD and Helldiver to drop 1000 LB AP almost all of the time if the victims are in normal range. Level bombers aren't supposed to load 1000 LB AP. USAAF didn't have them in their inventory. Sinking warships was the Navy's job.

ORIGINAL: doktorblood

I get SBD and Helldiver to drop 1000 LB AP almost all of the time if the victims are in normal range. Level bombers aren't supposed to load 1000 LB AP. USAAF didn't have them in their inventory. Sinking warships was the Navy's job.

SBDs and Helldivers are dropping 1000 lb GP bombs not AP. At least in the stock scenario and in Niks mod (any other mods I haven´t tried).

ORIGINAL: doktorblood

I get SBD and Helldiver to drop 1000 LB AP almost all of the time if the victims are in normal range. Level bombers aren't supposed to load 1000 LB AP. USAAF didn't have them in their inventory. Sinking warships was the Navy's job.

I'm not so sure about that.

First of all the B-17 was built to be an anti-shipping weapon, not a city destroyer.

I'm sure the AAF had every bit of ordinance you could imagine and then some.

B-17's generally loaded up with varying numbers of 100lb - 600lb bombs with the loadout standardizing closer to 500-600lb GP as the war progressed in 42. Based on readings of the concept, 250-500lb bombs would be the idea weapon of the B-17 anti ship idea as a good number of them could be carried. The idea was to saturate the target area so that a hit would be all but unavoidable.

Please, let's not let this one go down the B-17 toilet also.

-F-

[&:]

If your referring to the Surviving the heavies thread....there's one and one way to flush any thread.....make the thread personal by accusing or implying someone is part of a cabel determined to undermine one's favorite device. In the end, people will believe what they want. Thats fine with me. Just thought this info would be useful.

Not directed at you Nik.

I'm just saying for all the [:@] over B-17s, I'd leave them out of a thread about Bettys/Nells if possible. It's only going set off the same old arguments that get beaten to death.

I think the real question boils down to

a. What was the standard equipment for Anti-Shipping strikes for Bettys.
b. What was the standard equipment for Anti-Shipping strike by USAAF bombers.

I really have no idea what the answer is to either of those questions.

I just think that singling out the B-17s, will just escalate the unnecessarily.

-F-