Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

The game is obviously "borked" . Let the JFB's be happy. Forbid all allied planes from being able to drop anything but leaflets. [:(] And then they'll STILL bytch about something being "unfair". [8|]

Steve,

Not borked at all.

But, 4E's at night are not effected by anything that the IJ player can do. The only losses/issues are those that the allied player controls. So once the 4E's are bombing at night at 6000 ft, well the fun rapidly leaves the game. Most games set HR's to deal with this. They limit altitudes, moon, # planes attacking a location, etc.

Against the AI, it is more challenging. But I always just see it as stengthening the AI a bit.

You're saying that night CAP does not reduce the raids' effects?

ORIGINAL: witpqs

You're saying that night CAP does not reduce the raids' effects?

Correct, for 4E's night CAP only provides EXP for the 4E pilots. 2E's, night CAP works to discourage attacks very nicely on both sides. Why it is so different for 4E's I have no idea.

That's why there are so many HR's on it. Feel free to test yourself. I have extensively.

As I say, for me since I can only play the AI, I just mark it up to a bennie for the AI.

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

Stock version Roger?

No latest beta.

Roger

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo



But, 4E's at night are not effected by anything that the IJ player can do. The only losses/issues are those that the allied player controls. So once the 4E's are bombing at night at 6000 ft, well the fun rapidly leaves the game.

If I remember correctly that was pretty much reality once LeMay figured out how to do firebombing...Seems kind of strange to complain about the US actually ability to virtually destroy any Japanese city.

ORIGINAL: morejeffs
Seems kind of strange to complain about the US actually ability to virtually destroy any Japanese city.

Well, were we actually complaining about firebombing a many-square-miles wide city at night in late 1945, we wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Most of the issue is the night time bombing of airfields and ports in the early to mid war with seemingly no defensive response and unrealistic accuracy.

ORIGINAL: jetjockey

ORIGINAL: catwhoorg

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3

My own logic suggests that bombing at 100 feet is just not possible in WW2. Strafing yes, though at night you can't see the ground!

Kamikaze bombing I guess.


Roger

Operation Chastise would suggest that with trained crews 100 feet (well 60 actually) isn't too much of an issue.

Its not like you spend the whole flight at 100 feet, just the immediate target approach.

Operation Chastise was in effect a modified naval attack. Also, the crews were hand picked, intensely trained, and waited for the perfect weather. Flying at night, over land, is just not that easy. Flying at 100' altitude, over land and at night, even if just in the target zone, is just suicide.

True. And Chastise was one of very few missions, where the insertion (and egress ? I'm unsure on that portion) was at super low level.

Flying in at a few thousand feet, then drop to low level when in the vicinity would lead to much fewer ops losses. At the risk of greater chance of detection and interception enroute.

In the Pacific/SE Asia that is less of an issue than over Europe.

Even just night capable button would be nice.

ORIGINAL: morejeffs

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo



But, 4E's at night are not effected by anything that the IJ player can do. The only losses/issues are those that the allied player controls. So once the 4E's are bombing at night at 6000 ft, well the fun rapidly leaves the game.

If I remember correctly that was pretty much reality once LeMay figured out how to do firebombing...Seems kind of strange to complain about the US actually ability to virtually destroy any Japanese city.

Lemay didn't figure it out. Chennault did. He talked Lemay into night bombing Hangchow and Lemay was stunned when It went up like a big Roman candle.

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

The game is obviously "borked" . Let the JFB's be happy. Forbid all allied planes from being able to drop anything but leaflets. [:(] And then they'll STILL bytch about something being "unfair". [8|]

Steve,

Not borked at all.

But, 4E's at night are not effected by anything that the IJ player can do. The only losses/issues are those that the allied player controls. So once the 4E's are bombing at night at 6000 ft, well the fun rapidly leaves the game. Most games set HR's to deal with this. They limit altitudes, moon, # planes attacking a location, etc.

Against the AI, it is more challenging. But I always just see it as stengthening the AI a bit.

I disagree. The Japanese shoot down more B-29's than they actually did in real life. And cripple a whole lot more.

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: morejeffs
Seems kind of strange to complain about the US actually ability to virtually destroy any Japanese city.

Well, were we actually complaining about firebombing a many-square-miles wide city at night in late 1945, we wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Most of the issue is the night time bombing of airfields and ports in the early to mid war with seemingly no defensive response and unrealistic accuracy.

Ports are IN said cities. And generally the most easy to identify part. Airfields are several hundred feet by several thousand feet. Not exactly a SMALL target.

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: morejeffs
Seems kind of strange to complain about the US actually ability to virtually destroy any Japanese city.

Well, were we actually complaining about firebombing a many-square-miles wide city at night in late 1945, we wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Most of the issue is the night time bombing of airfields and ports in the early to mid war with seemingly no defensive response and unrealistic accuracy.

Ports are IN said cities. And generally the most easy to identify part. Airfields are several hundred feet by several thousand feet. Not exactly a SMALL target.

Steve:

1) Remember that some of the people arguing about this don't play with the betas. They don't know how many planes turn back or are lost now. And they haven't faced early-war night CAP and seen how much it disrupts attacks.

2) You're arguing with those who will never be convinced. They've read books.

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy




Well, were we actually complaining about firebombing a many-square-miles wide city at night in late 1945, we wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Most of the issue is the night time bombing of airfields and ports in the early to mid war with seemingly no defensive response and unrealistic accuracy.

Ports are IN said cities. And generally the most easy to identify part. Airfields are several hundred feet by several thousand feet. Not exactly a SMALL target.

Steve:

1) Remember that some of the people arguing about this don't play with the betas. They don't know how many planes turn back or are lost now. And they haven't faced early-war night CAP and seen how much it disrupts attacks.

2) You're arguing with those who will never be convinced. They've read books.

So do I. Apparently different books. The difference is I want a reasonable game (which we have). THEY will NEVER be satisfied. So give them a scenario where the Japs win. Then they can play till they are senseless and happy. Then we can get on with playing a reasonable and accurate version of ww2. And they can have their fantasy. [:D]

AW1Steve: I'd certainly recommend you listen to the testimony of those on this forum that have been there and done that (night bombing in the Second World War). Particularly those that were engaged in night bombing early in the war.

What's that? No one here been there and done that? Maybe a written history / biography / AAR would be worthwhile then.

I always appreciate the germane comments of those that have been there and done that. Everything else is second hand knowledge.

As for the books cited-we've read the same book (or at least I have). "Fortress Rabaul" details those issues I've described above in detail. You may want to review it if you haven't already.

It's one thing to make your opinions based upon reading written source material. It's entirely another to *not* read written source material and formulate an opinion. I'm not directing this comment at you necessarily, but others that stick by their inexplicable position that is not supported by any history of which I'm aware.

I have seen about a years worth of sporadic night bombing but nothing like you experienced. Ten months of DBB and six months of CG2 with Andy's tweaks. I do remember some CG1 stock raids that were pretty harsh but not so hard as yours.

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve



Ports are IN said cities. And generally the most easy to identify part. Airfields are several hundred feet by several thousand feet. Not exactly a SMALL target.

Steve:

1) Remember that some of the people arguing about this don't play with the betas. They don't know how many planes turn back or are lost now. And they haven't faced early-war night CAP and seen how much it disrupts attacks.

2) You're arguing with those who will never be convinced. They've read books.

So do I. Apparently different books. The difference is I want a reasonable game (which we have). THEY will NEVER be satisfied. So give them a scenario where the Japs win. Then they can play till they are senseless and happy. Then we can get on with playing a reasonable and accurate version of ww2. And they can have their fantasy. [:D]

As I've said elsewhere, I can talk submarines. You can talk planes. I listen to those who have done it and not just read about it. As we used to say in the boats when a nugget had an opinion, "I got more time on the sh***er at test depth than you've got in the Navy, boy." Substitute, "Goin' real fast, real low, real dark" and that's you. Books are extra.

OTOH, some here know from wings, but they aren't made of metal. Gobble, gobble!!!!

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

So do I. Apparently different books. The difference is I want a reasonable game (which we have). THEY will NEVER be satisfied. So give them a scenario where the Japs win. Then they can play till they are senseless and happy. Then we can get on with playing a reasonable and accurate version of ww2. And they can have their fantasy. [:D]

Hi AW1Steve,

Would an biography with quotes from people that have been there and done that be a satisfactory primary source for you? Some people may shudder at the fact that the interview / AAR is in a (GASP) book, but I think we've progressed enough as a culture that interviews recorded in a (GASP) book can substitute. Don't you?

Anyways, if you're interested in some decent interviews, read the book I've recommended. Maybe if you're bull-headed about not reading a book, you can find it on a CD through the library.

I wouldn't consider the thoughtfully recorded words of veterans that have been there and done that so flippantly as others here.

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

The game is obviously "borked" . Let the JFB's be happy. Forbid all allied planes from being able to drop anything but leaflets. [:(] And then they'll STILL bytch about something being "unfair". [8|]

Steve,

Not borked at all.

But, 4E's at night are not effected by anything that the IJ player can do. The only losses/issues are those that the allied player controls. So once the 4E's are bombing at night at 6000 ft, well the fun rapidly leaves the game. Most games set HR's to deal with this. They limit altitudes, moon, # planes attacking a location, etc.

Against the AI, it is more challenging. But I always just see it as stengthening the AI a bit.

I disagree. The Japanese shoot down more B-29's than they actually did in real life. And cripple a whole lot more.

At night? Were not talking about daylight bombing ... this is night bombing by 4E's. Not 2E's.

There are quite a few AAR's running and at least the ones I am following have all started with or added restrictions to night bombing on 4E's. That to me is the relevant reality.... doesn't that suggest something?

I think I keep rolling box cars.[:@]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo



Steve,

Not borked at all.

But, 4E's at night are not effected by anything that the IJ player can do. The only losses/issues are those that the allied player controls. So once the 4E's are bombing at night at 6000 ft, well the fun rapidly leaves the game. Most games set HR's to deal with this. They limit altitudes, moon, # planes attacking a location, etc.

Against the AI, it is more challenging. But I always just see it as stengthening the AI a bit.

I disagree. The Japanese shoot down more B-29's than they actually did in real life. And cripple a whole lot more.

At night? Were not talking about daylight bombing ... this is night bombing by 4E's. Not 2E's.

There are quite a few AAR's running and at least the ones I am following have all started with or added restrictions to night bombing on 4E's. That to me is the relevant reality.... doesn't that suggest something?

Night bombing of Manpower should be allowed as is in the late game to give the Allies what they used in the war. It's powerful, as it should be, but not overwhelmingly so, and ops losses can still be high.

Night bombing on any target requiring accuracy should probably be HRed as the game version is much too accurate. There are NO instances I've been able to find of sustained campaigns against airfields or pinpoint defenses during the war that resulted in the kind of devastation possible in game. If night bombing en masse could have been used effectively in the war, why was it not used except against the equivalent of 'Manpower?'

In one game we've adopted a 50 bomber per target limit on night bombing which seems satisfactory for airfield and port bombing.