Shipboard AA Performance

[Nomad]

Will a Sky Ninja do?

[tigercub]

I think the case has been made for more AMMO and better late war FLAK and nice to see experience helps flak too.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: FatR

Sardaukar, your second quote is pretty interesting. However, there is a world of difference between RL Okinawa and the battle in which witpqs got his head handed to him.

First of all, most attacks in the Okinawa campaign were performed by small groups of aircraft and often by single aircraft. Small, fragmented strikes are naturally easier to repel by AAA (both in terms of planes shot down and prevention of damage to one's own ships) than huge and coordinated ones, which prevent concentration of fire on a few targets at a time.

Note, that the battle in question prominently features the effect of mass. Take day 1. In the initial morning raid 278 planes broke through to American ships and scored 30 hits. In the initial afternoon raid 291 planes reached ships and scored 44 hits. The secondary morning raids achieved 1 hit from 19 planes and the secondary afternon raid 1 hit from 36 planes, both on cripples. Remnant raids hit nothing. Also, while this might be a fluke, as far as I can see disproportionally many losses to AA fire happened during the first passes of each raid.
Also note, that the overall hit rate of 76 bombs and torpedoes from almost 650 planes (about 11,7%) is not at all awesome, even though these planes were flown by crack crews. The main reason why Japanese won is almost 650 attack planes breaking through to the ships (and this happened primarily due to strategic, operational and tactical mismanagement on the Allied part, plus, it must be admitted, some amount of bad luck). I'm frankly disturbed by the perspective of developers possibly introducing changes in the game model on the basis of this battle. The game should not be changed to compensate for such things.

Second, pilots quality. Someone said here it doesn't matter against AA, but this is all sorts of wrong. CnG had airgroups of quality never achieved by Japanese in the real war - a core of pre-war aces that had plenty of time and opportunity to study reports from the frontlines and adapt late-war anti-AA methods, such as making dives in groups of three and nine, instead of one by one - while still capable of attacking with both accuracy and determination. Still led by experienced commanders, and having the above-mentioned benefit of a massive strike, they by all rights should be more efficient in evading and suppressing (by quickly scoring disabling hits) enemy TFs' flak.

Third, planes quality. Alot of planes expended at Okinawa were obsolete models, compared to what CnG fielded.

won´t comment this post other than asking if you have read the loss rates to flak in Sardaukar´s post, or if you have even looked at the US losses the document shows I´ve posted a link. But perhaps you also have a couple of lines that justify the fact that a TF of, let´s say, 4 CV, 2 modern BB, 8 CA/CL and 11 Fletcher DD runs low on ammo after being attacked by something like 100 aircraft? If you can, you sure can come up with an explanation why a sub usually runs low on shells after sinking a single barge. This will sure be funny...

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: castor troy
won´t comment this post other than asking if you have read the loss rates to flak in Sardaukar´s post, or if you have even looked at the US losses the document shows I´ve posted a link. But perhaps you also have a couple of lines that justify the fact that a TF of, let´s say, 4 CV, 2 modern BB, 8 CA/CL and 11 Fletcher DD runs low on ammo after being attacked by something like 100 aircraft? If you can, you sure can come up with an explanation why a sub usually runs low on shells after sinking a single barge. This will sure be funny...

Actually, I won't argue with this. AA artillery runs out of ammo too fast in the stock game. That's why JuanG's mods and Scen 70 added more.

[Sly]

I want to support Castor and Sardaukar and others  who thinking  that  allied  shipboard flak is to weak.
I have run some tests myself in Coral Sea Scenario.
Settings:
Lexington vs 17 D3A1 from Shokaku group with very experied pilots at 10.000ft, without a Cap, different weather.
Lex commander was Sherman, crew exp. about 50.
I run about 10 turns Lex without escort and then 10 turns Lex with 2 DD escorts.
Results:
1. there was 2 turns then nothing happend (its not easy to search one ship)
2. once Vals attacked but dont hit Lex, during the rain weather,
3. Other 17 times Lex was attacked and was sinking about 10 times (6-8 bomb hits).
And flak??
Only once I noticed flak fired some bomber flights BEFORE bombs run, realising point was normally between 1000-3000ft.
All other time flak fired (if any) after bombs run.
Effectivnes??
Flak  dont  destroy  any  aircraft in  20  raids  japs lost only one aircraft as opps lost. After each turn I chacked all Valls group and at most one aircraft was damaged status although more planes (3-5) has some damaged even with ready status.
Ammo usage??
Looked at Lex then she dont sunk, I undrestand that she fired only a few times. 6x5inch RS device 3 times, once 20mm oerlikon, once 0.5 MGs etc. And 1.1 inch x4 batteries on left or right or forward or center usually dont ever fired.
I think everyone can run his own tests but remark this all automatic weapon and 5inch-es dont fired during a dive from 10.000ft to 1000ft leads me to conclusion there is somethig wrong with allied AAA performence.
I hope it isnt because the effectivnes of DP guns in AAA area was lowerd down in last patch.
[align=left] [/align]