Matrix Games Forums

David asked that we use 2.11 before commenting on the air to air results which were fixed in the patch. Here are the results from 2 consecutive turns in which I played both sides. I set the fighter cap at Rabaul to 100% and left them at default altitudes. Unescorted Allied B17s from Lunga were set at the default 6000.
Day 2 (in the rain) 21 B17s reached the target to be met with 155 fighters. Results: (destroyed/damaged)
Rufe 3/0
A6M2 8/7
A6M3 29/19
Oscar 6/4 This represents 46 fighters shot down and 30 damaged -- approx 50% of the fighters were hit by 21 B17s!!
B17: 13/8
DAY 2
This time I sent 51 unescorted bombers from PM to Rabaul. 16 Libs and 45 Forts. They were met with a cap of 113 fighters.
Results:
Rufe 4/1
A6M2 13/14
A6M3 12/13
Oscar 6/6 Total 35 destroyed, 34 damaged.

B24 5/12
B17 7/32
A final raid was 3 B17 from Lunga which was wet by 59 fighters. The B17s escaped unscathed and shot down 4, damaging 4 others.
The bombers in one raid per squadron from each base ( except for the 3 planes from Lunga which flew twice) amassed 3 Aces-- one with 6 kills and 2 with 5. An additional 11 bombers recorded 3 or more kills. By contrast the Japanese had only 5 pilots with 2 kills each-- probably because their LIFE EXPECTANCY AGAINST UNESCORTED BOMBERS IS APPARENTLY SHORTER THAN THAT OF A FIRST LIEUTENANT IN WORLD WAR I!!!!!!!
Please, Please tone down the defensive fire effectiveness of allied bombers. This really does remove the fun from playing-- why spend all the time and effort necessary to seize and develop air bases and ports only to have the fighters routinely eliminated by unescorted bombers? With these results, why would the allies even need fighters? I am not a stickler about historicity in game modelling although I deplore modernised Shakespearean productions). What I expect is that the game remain fun.
I applaud your efforts in continually improving the game-- but in the specific area of the effectiveness of unescorted bomber defensive fire, this attempt failed, I believe. I agree with the sentiments of others in the forum who believed that the 1.4 version seemed a good fit for air combat results. I really wouldn't mind these results from fighter on fighter combat-- that would be within the realm of probability and would remain fun as well as challenging. But the bombers have seemingly been adjusted to fire armament with capabilities that detract from my gaming experience. I hope this didn't sound overly negative-- I love the game-- but unless the results are tempered-- I will go back to 1.4 which will eliminate, to a great extent, PBEM games for me.
I agree with the idea that merely reducing the effectiveness of bomber defensive fire would work. I am not asking for any other revision in the game or new patch ideas.

Originally posted by U2
I could not agree more:)

Really. With US level bombers shooting down everything in sight, the game is not currently playable. And you advocate leaving it that way???? Maybe the beta testers are the problem.........

Originally posted by zed
I agree. .... I hope all patches and changes are done. Lets turn out attention to WITP.

Well, then we don't TOTALLY agree do we?

I think that the ability to essentially conduct fighter sweeps with level bombers (the Allied ones in particular) absolutely needs to be addressed in some fashion before UV can be called "done". It's very close to that point otherwise, but this problem is bad enough to stop me from playing it if it isn't addressed.

To repeat, the idea isn't to make Allied bombers more vulnerable to fighters (I think the game is right in that aspect) ... it's only to make fighters somewhat less vulnerable to Allied bombers. The main benefit of all of those defensive guns should be to hold attacking fighters at bay, not to rack up kills.

- David

I agree that the game is really almost there, but put me on the list requesting a little more "intelligence" on the part of the AI Zero pilots when throwing themselves against unescorted bombers.

I wanted to test this patch for myself, my results were:

21 B-17s unescorted to Rabual on turn 3 of Scen 17

They are intercepted by 44 Zeros, including obviously some from the carriers now in Rabaul plus 4 Claudes

16 Zeros are shot down
13 damaged

Nearly 3/4s of my fighters are affected, while I did damage a lot of 17s, 22 only 7 were lost

I need to know how to reinstall version 2.0 can anyone help me? I assume Maxtrix will patch this, but until then I'd like to continue on with my games, however one turn of this kind of combat could gut an elite squadron in such a way it will never recover.

Clearly this part of the combat model needs a final tweek or two. In other types of combat fighter v. fighter, or even fighter v. Jap Bomber, its fine, but the uber Bomber concept makes the early war airforce concept of "the bomber always gets through" an understatement, its gets through and takes out enemy fighters and more than a 2 to 1 ratio!

Mike

Just a goofy thought ... maybe the developers at 2by3 were reading one of Dale Brown's fanciful novels about all-seeing, all-doing uber-bombers when working on the patch?

- David

(Relax, it's just a silly joke! I don't actually believe this bomber behavior was foreseen or intended.)

Hi all,
I at last installed v2.11, here are the results of my latest turn (playing IJN, 6 Oct 1942) hoping they can be of interest to anyone:

Air attack on Port Moresby , at 10,40

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 41
G3M Nell x 3
G4M1 Betty x 11
J1N1-R Irving x 2

Allied aircraft
Wirraway x 6
P-400 Airacobra x 3
P-39D Airacobra x 11
P-40E Kittyhawk x 12
P-40E Warhawk x 4

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero x 2 destroyed
G4M1 Betty x 1 destroyed
G4M1 Betty x 2 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
Wirraway x 2 destroyed
P-400 Airacobra x 1 destroyed
P-400 Airacobra x 1 damaged
P-39D Airacobra x 5 destroyed
P-39D Airacobra x 1 damaged
P-40E Kittyhawk x 2 destroyed
P-40E Warhawk x 2 destroyed
P-40E Warhawk x 1 damaged
B-24D Liberator x 1 destroyed

LCDR U.Obuchi of F2/1st Daitai is credited with kill number 6

Airbase hits 1
Runway hits 6

Attacking Level Bombers:
3 x G3M Nell at 6000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty at 6000 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty at 6000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty at 6000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on Marilinan , at 8,34


Allied aircraft
F-5A Lightning x 2
B-17E Fortress x 8


no losses

Airbase hits 4
Runway hits 4

Attacking Level Bombers:
4 x B-17E Fortress at 6000 feet
4 x B-17E Fortress at 6000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on 10th Ind Engineer Regiment, at 17,42


Allied aircraft
F-5A Lightning x 1
B-24D Liberator x 3


no losses

Attacking Level Bombers:
3 x B-24D Liberator at 6000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF, near Lae at 9,33

Japanese aircraft
A6M3 Zero x 35
Ki-43-Ia Oscar x 3

Allied aircraft
Beaufighter VIC x 3

no losses

Allied aircraft losses
Beaufighter VIC x 2 destroyed
Beaufighter VIC x 1 damaged

Japanese Ships
AP Yamafuku Maru

Attacking Level Bombers:
1 x Beaufighter VIC at 200 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF, near Lae at 9,33

Japanese aircraft
A6M3 Zero x 35
Ki-43-Ia Oscar x 3

Allied aircraft
Beaufighter VIC x 3
Beaufort x 9
P-40E Warhawk x 2
B-26B Marauder x 5

no losses

Allied aircraft losses
Beaufighter VIC x 4 damaged
Beaufort x 1 destroyed
Beaufort x 2 damaged

LTJG W.Katsuma of DII-1 Daitai is credited with kill number 3

Japanese Ships
DD Yunagi, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CL Naka, Torpedo hits 1, on fire

Attacking Level Bombers:
4 x Beaufort at 200 feet
1 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet
4 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet
4 x Beaufort at 200 feet
3 x Beaufighter VIC at 200 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF, near Lae at 9,33

Japanese aircraft
A6M3 Zero x 22
Ki-43-Ia Oscar x 1

Allied aircraft
Wirraway x 10
P-400 Airacobra x 3
P-39D Airacobra x 7
P-40E Kittyhawk x 3
P-40E Warhawk x 4
B-26B Marauder x 10
A-20B Havoc x 7

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M3 Zero x 2 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-400 Airacobra x 1 damaged
P-40E Warhawk x 1 destroyed
A-20B Havoc x 1 damaged

Japanese Ships
DD Yunagi, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
CL Naka, Bomb hits 1, on fire
AP Nankai Maru
AP Tatsuwa Maru
AP Keisho Maru
DD Mochizuki

Attacking Level Bombers:
2 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet
4 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet
3 x A-20B Havoc at 6000 feet
4 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet
4 x A-20B Havoc at 6000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF, near Lae at 9,33

Japanese aircraft
A6M3 Zero x 33
Ki-43-Ia Oscar x 3

Allied aircraft
P-40E Kittyhawk x 3
B-26B Marauder x 3

no losses

Allied aircraft losses
P-40E Kittyhawk x 1 destroyed

LTJG M.Sakai of DII-1 Daitai is credited with kill number 4

Japanese Ships
AP Reiyo Maru, Bomb hits 3, on fire, heavy damage

Attacking Level Bombers:
3 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF at 11,34


Allied aircraft
A-20B Havoc x 3


no losses

Japanese Ships
AP Kamoi Maru, heavy damage

Attacking Level Bombers:
3 x A-20B Havoc at 6000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF, near Lae at 9,33

Japanese aircraft
A6M3 Zero x 28
Ki-43-Ia Oscar x 5

Allied aircraft
Wirraway x 7
P-39D Airacobra x 5
P-40E Kittyhawk x 10
P-40E Warhawk x 3

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M3 Zero x 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Wirraway x 1 destroyed
Wirraway x 1 damaged
P-39D Airacobra x 1 damaged
P-40E Kittyhawk x 4 destroyed

PO2 B.Morioka of DII-1 Daitai is credited with kill number 7
SLDR O.Pringle of 76th RAAF Squadron bails out and is CAPTURED

Japanese Ships
DD Mochizuki
CL Naka, on fire
AP Kiyozumi Maru, Bomb hits 1, on fire
AP Tatsuwa Maru


As you can see, small groups of Allied planes managed to slip past a powerful CAP and hit a CL, a DD and two transports (REIYO MARU eventually sank) with reasonable losses. The IJN units flying CAP had seen a lot of combat lately, fatigue between 16 and 26 and morale around 70 on average.

On the other hand, a Japanese raid on Port Moresby escorted by two strong, well-rested and high-morale Zero units easily overwhelmed the feeble Allied CAP, claiming 12 fighters (plus one B-24 on the ground) for the loss of 2 Zeros and 1 Betty.

The results look quite reasonable to me, and the Wirraways no longer dogfight Zeros without suffering an scratch!!!

For now I'm quite pleased with v2.11, let's see if I am thinking the same after tangling with unescorted B-17s...


Entemedor

I don't doubt that some people are having problems with the combat results. I'm playing games both as the Allies and Japan right now, and it DOES seem that Allied bombers are doing a little too well aganist Zero's. I'm just not sure it's to the scale that people are saying that it is.

I'm sure there are other factors involved, but I'm not sure if we know all of them.

For example, in one of my Allied PBEM games, my foe complained about how he lost two Betty squadrons that were escorted on a air attack on PM. He had about 50 Bettys and 24 Zeros.

What he did'nt know was that I had about 140 fighters and fighter/bombers based in PM, all of them rested (they had'nt done anything for a few game days) and many with experience. They also were all on long rage CAP. P-39's and P-40's here, the best I could offer. I had about 65 fighters rise to meet his planes. You can guess what happened.

Granted, I know the above example does'nt deal with Level Bombers.....but it suggests that Zero's were toned down in all aspects in these last patches, and could be cause of the failure in dealing with Allied bombers as well.

Could the alttitude levels also be playing a factor in what is going on here? It seems my Allied Level Bombers are getting too many hits on ships then they should historicaly. If the LB's were tweaked to be a little less effective and the Zero's tweaked to be a little better, it should reduce the losses to 'historical' levels (with the understanding losses are going to be WAY higher in the game then they were historicaly due to our playing.)

Rather than simply speculate on why things are the way they are, you could contribute to the Area 51 testing.

Well, as I said, I don't want to post there cause I don't agree it's a problem like you and some of the others do. I just said some MINOR tweaking could be made. I have yet to see really any proof -- even in eariler patches my level bombers were shooting down more Zero's then planes lost, and as Japan I've shot them down at a acceptable one for one rate.

Then post your test results that show it is not a problem. Area 51 is for testing puposes to gain data to make a case for or against changes.

Well, as I feared...
I'm not so happy with v2.11 after meeting the heavies.
As you will see in the report below, 64 Japanese fighters intercepted exactly the same number of Allied fighters, escorting 36 Marauders, 27 B-17 & 24 and 10 Havoc. The fighter combat was bloody but more or less equilibrated (20 IJN losses against 28 Allied losses), then came the bomber segment... and results were 5 Marauder and 5 heavies DAMAGED against 21 Japanese figjters DESTROYED. Final result, 41 losses from 64 CAP fighters engaged. No wonder the subsequent small raids did not find any opposition, sinking the Jap transports without problems.
That is a blow which destroys with one single stroke the work of weeks. The IJN had been slowly building up its fighter strenght at Lae, resting squadrons often; now in one day, 41 planes lost (actual losses according to Intel were even higher, a total of 52) including the four top-scoring pilots and three squadron commanders. The scenario is as good as finished (at least in New Guinea).
Perhaps I will cheat against the AI (for the first time!) and replay the same turn hoping for a more realistic result... or I will concede the scenario to the AI (shame!).

Entemedor


AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 10/07/42

Weather: Partly Cloudy

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on Lae , at 9,33

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 40
A6M3 Zero x 18
Ki-43-Ia Oscar x 8

Allied aircraft
Beaufighter VIC x 3
Wirraway x 1
P-400 Airacobra x 5
P-39D Airacobra x 37
P-40E Kittyhawk x 10
P-40E Warhawk x 11
F-5A Lightning x 4
B-26B Marauder x 36
B-17E Fortress x 18
B-24D Liberator x 9
A-20B Havoc x 10

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero x 30 destroyed
A6M2 Zero x 15 damaged
A6M3 Zero x 9 destroyed
A6M3 Zero x 10 damaged
Ki-43-Ia Oscar x 2 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Wirraway x 1 destroyed
P-400 Airacobra x 6 destroyed
P-39D Airacobra x 10 destroyed
P-39D Airacobra x 16 damaged
P-40E Kittyhawk x 3 destroyed
P-40E Kittyhawk x 5 damaged
P-40E Warhawk x 8 destroyed
P-40E Warhawk x 2 damaged
B-26B Marauder x 5 damaged
B-17E Fortress x 4 damaged
B-24D Liberator x 1 damaged

LTJG J.Ohara of F2/Tainan Daitai is credited with kill number 8

LTJG J.Ohara of F2/Tainan Daitai is KILLED

Japanese ground losses:
Men lost 842
Guns lost 4

Airbase hits 22
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 89

Attacking Level Bombers:
3 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet
3 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 6000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 6000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 6000 feet
3 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet
3 x A-20B Havoc at 6000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 6000 feet
7 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet
3 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet
4 x A-20B Havoc at 6000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 6000 feet
6 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet
3 x B-24D Liberator at 6000 feet
3 x B-24D Liberator at 6000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 6000 feet
6 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet
3 x B-24D Liberator at 6000 feet
5 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet
3 x Beaufighter VIC at 6000 feet
3 x A-20B Havoc at 6000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF, near Lae at 9,33


Allied aircraft
P-39D Airacobra x 3
B-26B Marauder x 3


no losses

Japanese Ships
AP Yamafuku Maru, Bomb hits 1, on fire

Attacking Level Bombers:
3 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF, near Lae at 9,33


Allied aircraft
Hudson x 9


Allied aircraft losses
Hudson x 2 damaged

Japanese Ships
AP Tamashima Maru, Bomb hits 1, on fire
CL Naka

Attacking Level Bombers:
4 x Hudson at 6000 feet
2 x Hudson at 6000 feet
3 x Hudson at 6000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF, near Lae at 9,33


Allied aircraft
P-39D Airacobra x 12
P-40E Kittyhawk x 3
B-26B Marauder x 6


no losses

Japanese Ships
AP Sado Maru, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
AP Kyokusei Maru, Bomb hits 4, on fire, heavy damage

Attacking Level Bombers:
2 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet
4 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet

This is typical for me under 2.11 for an unescorted bomber raid. Fatigue nil for both sides. Ward an ace after this one raid. Ouch.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 02/17/43

Weather: Clear

Air attack on Rabaul , at 21,28

Japanese aircraft
A6M2-N Rufe x 4
A6M2 Zero x 36
A6M3 Zero x 68
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 13

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 36
B-24D Liberator x 23

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2-N Rufe x 2 destroyed
A6M2-N Rufe x 1 damaged
A6M2 Zero x 11 destroyed
A6M2 Zero x 18 damaged
A6M3 Zero x 21 destroyed
A6M3 Zero x 19 damaged
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 11 destroyed
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 4 damaged
Ki-57-I Topsy x 1 destroyed
Ki-57-I Topsy x 1 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress x 15 destroyed
B-17E Fortress x 22 damaged
B-24D Liberator x 6 destroyed
B-24D Liberator x 21 damaged

1LT N.Ward of 63rd BS is credited with kill number 5

Thanks for the reply friend, i'm trying to d/l 2.11 aw we speak .. by the look of the results the rather glaring errors in 2.1 are fixed.

thank you to matrix and david in particular in keeping us players up to date on info and patches, not many other companies are so accomodating.

thank you again and i can't wait till WITP(or whatever it's going to be called) is available, with the feedback from such a helpful and organised fanbase the game WILL be fantastic.

Rob

This is typical for me under 2.11 for an unescorted bomber raid. Fatigue nil for both sides. Ward an ace after this one raid. Ouch.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 02/17/43

Weather: Clear

Air attack on Rabaul , at 21,28

Japanese aircraft
A6M2-N Rufe x 4
A6M2 Zero x 36
A6M3 Zero x 68
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 13

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 36
B-24D Liberator x 23

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2-N Rufe x 2 destroyed
A6M2-N Rufe x 1 damaged
A6M2 Zero x 11 destroyed
A6M2 Zero x 18 damaged
A6M3 Zero x 21 destroyed
A6M3 Zero x 19 damaged
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 11 destroyed
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 4 damaged
Ki-57-I Topsy x 1 destroyed
Ki-57-I Topsy x 1 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress x 15 destroyed
B-17E Fortress x 22 damaged
B-24D Liberator x 6 destroyed
B-24D Liberator x 21 damaged

1LT N.Ward of 63rd BS is credited with kill number 5

Originally posted by dpstafford

Really. With US level bombers shooting down everything in sight, the game is not currently playable. And you advocate leaving it that way???? Maybe the beta testers are the problem.........

Beta testers do not design wargames.....did you not know that?

Dan

Originally posted by U2
Beta testers do not design wargames.....did you not know that?

Don't make me turn you in for unauthorized use of that EDGE photo....... I've got no problem with the game's design. But there have been a couple of notable failures of either support and/or testing. And this is one of them.

It does appear that Matrix is taking action on this, so there is some hope that my PBEM opponents will come back and the games can continue...........

Well, I just had my first run in with this problem......

BTW, the Zeros were well rested but the squadrons had not seen much action.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/28/42

Weather: Thunderstorms

Air attack on Rabaul , at 21,28

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 89

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 24

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero x 35 destroyed
A6M2 Zero x 9 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress x 5 destroyed
B-17E Fortress x 16 damaged

MAJ H.Ward of 30th BS is credited with kill number 4

LT K. Okajima of EII-1 Daitai is KILLED

Airbase hits 1
Runway hits 3

Attacking Level Bombers:
0 x B-17E Fortress at 26000 feet
2 x B-17E Fortress at 26000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 26000 feet
2 x B-17E Fortress at 26000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 26000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 26000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 26000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 26000 feet


I checked with my opponent, actuall planes lost were 27 Zeros and 5 Bombers.

HOWEVER, I was also told that due to the long flight back to PM for the bombers, 7 of the damaged ones crashed -- meaning he lost 12 all together. That's not a horrible ratio, but it does seem high. They only were lost due to distance.

Observations:
Could the high altitude of the bombers have anything to do with it? Zeros were not that effective that high. I suspect that's some of the problem.
Also, it seems like the Zero's are taking on the bombers one-on-one -- not a good thing to do. If you have planes, like in this case, the planes should be swooping in from all directions -- one from above, one from ahead, and one from below.

Originally posted by SoulBlazer
Well, I just had my first run in with this problem......

A6M2 Zero x 27 destroyed (of 89)
B-17E Fortress x 5 destroyed (of 24).

OUCH!

I was also told that due to the long flight back to PM for the bombers, 7 of the damaged ones crashed -- meaning he lost 12 all together. That's not a horrible ratio, but it does seem high. They only were lost due to distance.

Actually this part (losing seven a/c on the return flight) doesn't seem wrong to me. At least in the European theatre it was common for damaged bombers to attempt to use their high altitude to make it back to England on one or two badly shot-up and smoking engines ... but many of them just couldn't quite stretch their glides long enough to make it.

Could the high altitude of the bombers have anything to do with it? Zeros were not that effective that high. I suspect that's some of the problem.

I for one don't think that's the issue here. In my last game Hudsons, Mitchells and Marauders were having their way with Zeros ... at 2000 feet.

- David

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/19/42

Weather: Partly Cloudy

Air attack on Port Moresby , at 10,40

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 7

no losses

Runway hits 2

Attacking Level Bombers:
7 x G4M1 Betty at 6000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 20,27

Japanese Ships
MSW Seki Maru #3, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
SS S-44


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF at 13,42

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 59

Allied aircraft
SBD Dauntless x 3
Wirraway x 5
P-39D Airacobra x 8
B-26B Marauder x 6

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero x 8 destroyed
A6M2 Zero x 3 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
SBD Dauntless x 1 destroyed
SBD Dauntless x 1 damaged
Wirraway x 1 destroyed
Wirraway x 3 damaged
P-39D Airacobra x 2 destroyed
P-39D Airacobra x 3 damaged
B-26B Marauder x 5 destroyed
B-26B Marauder x 2 damaged

FO J. Jacobs of 35th FS is credited with kill number 4

LT M. Sato of AII-1 Daitai is KILLED

Japanese Ships
CA Ashigara
DD Shirakumo

Attacking Level Bombers:
2 x B-26B Marauder at 6000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF, near Port Moresby at 10,40

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 10
A6M3 Zero x 14
G3M Nell x 3
G4M1 Betty x 9

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 18
P-39D Airacobra x 20

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero x 3 destroyed
A6M3 Zero x 6 destroyed
G3M Nell x 2 damaged
G4M1 Betty x 1 destroyed
G4M1 Betty x 7 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat x 1 destroyed
F4F-4 Wildcat x 6 damaged
P-39D Airacobra x 3 destroyed
P-39D Airacobra x 3 damaged

LT S. Ruehlow of VF-8 is credited with kill number 3

LT J. Smith of VF-8 is KILLED

Allied Ships
DD Walke
AK Barwon

Attacking Level Bombers:
3 x G3M Nell at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty at 200 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF at 9,49

Japanese aircraft
D3A Val x 14
B5N Kate x 35

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 15

Japanese aircraft losses
D3A Val x 2 destroyed
D3A Val x 2 damaged
B5N Kate x 20 destroyed
B5N Kate x 13 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat x 4 damaged

LTJG J. Kelley of VF-6 is credited with kill number 4

Allied Ships
CA Salt Lake City
CV Enterprise, Bomb hits 1
CL Nashville, Bomb hits 1
CA Vincennes


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF at 9,49

Japanese aircraft
D3A Val x 16
B5N Kate x 17

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 15

Japanese aircraft losses
D3A Val x 2 destroyed
D3A Val x 3 damaged
B5N Kate x 9 destroyed
B5N Kate x 11 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat x 2 damaged

LTJG M. Kleinmann of VF-6 is credited with kill number 5

LT T. Ichihara of EI-3 Daitai bails out and is CAPTURED

Allied Ships
CV Enterprise, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
CA Indianapolis, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF at 9,44

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 42
D3A Val x 47
B5N Kate x 16

Japanese aircraft losses
D3A Val x 1 damaged
B5N Kate x 1 damaged

Allied Ships
CV Yorktown, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
CV Hornet, Bomb hits 10, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
DD Grayson, Bomb hits 1, on fire


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF at 13,42

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 57

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 3

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero x 3 destroyed
A6M2 Zero x 2 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress x 1 destroyed
B-17E Fortress x 2 damaged

1LT U.Evans of 30th BS is credited with kill number 4

Japanese Ships
CV Shokaku

Attacking Level Bombers:
2 x B-17E Fortress at 16000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF at 9,49

Japanese aircraft
B5N Kate x 16

no losses


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF at 9,44

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 27
D3A Val x 55
B5N Kate x 5

no losses


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Shortland Island at 29,34

Japanese Ships
MSW Fumi Maru #2

Allied Ships
SS Argonaut


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Conclusion #1;

I just got my a$$ kicked

Conclusion #2;

I wont be sitting down for a week

Conclusion #3;

PBEM'ers all over the world are currently laughing at me

Conclusion #4;

use of entire 3-CV fighter wing on LRCAP was successful in defending an emergency supply run to Port Morosby (previous turn before last and last)

Conclusion #5;

Fighters on LRCAP cant be in 2 places at the same time....making carrier TF vulnerable to a reacting enemy CV force

Conclusion #6;

Jack Fletcher was a better carrier commander than me

Conclusion #7;

Matrix introduced a new HL....."Flight Deck" WHOO HOO!

Conclusion #8;

Having an intact one to launch some counter-attacks from would be nice.

Conclusion #9;

Air to air combat is SUPERB in 2.11....... change nothing except one thing. see below

Conclusion #10

Matrix Rocks!

Conclusion #11

After this preformance.....I think i'm ready for PBEM....look out Mogami, i'm coming to take your title away.

Conclusion #12

People already know my opinion vis-a-vis bomber defensive fire. Just thought i'd post this entire turn for the general amusement of all not to mention showing that once more, even a 3 B-17 element scored better than most fighter groups can hope too.....the B-26 Marauders also claimed kills higher than their number damaged or destroyed. Sigh....other than that....WHAT A GAME!!!!!!

I have read that Matrix is currently looking at Bomber defensive fire so to speak (i.e., looking at air combat some more) so further arguing is somewhat redundant at this point. However i still find the thread interesting and would just like to add a few more cents to things.

I feel that what distracts and complicates the argument is that too much attention is paid to the weapons and the planes themselves vs the more critical issue. To me, the issue is not the DUR of the B-17 or other Allied bombers or the lack thereof of the A6M, nor is it the fact that the A6M was a poor bomber interceptor given that it was built for an offensive posture vs a defensive one.

The central issue in my mind is that it is a difficult task for bomber gunners to hit fast moving and maneuvering fighter planes. Were this not the case, then the original proponents of Strategic Bombing would have been proven right when they boasted that heavily armed and armored long range bombers could strike at the heart of the enemy with impunity, with no need for fighters since (at the time) they were too short ranged to escort them anyway.

This gleefully optimistic appraisal of the what WWII air combat would be like was promptly turned on it's ear when it was attempted. It didnt happen in Europe, and as far as I can tell, it didn't happen in the Pacific either. The scale was different.....the combat environments were different, but not the basic rule of thumb that unescorted bombers are easy marks for fighters......"marks" defined as, the little hornets can shoot em up, if not necessarily shoot them down (such as when A6M's try to do in Allied four engine beasties with 7.7 ammo and limited 20mm)

Havn't read it from Japanese accounts which confirm the legendary DUR of the B-17 (far less so for the twin engined variety), but dont sweat their defensive fire.....and havn't read it from the Allied side which also appeared to fear little, bomber defensive fire. Even with their statistically impressive 20mm tail stingers, few if any F4F's or other Allied fighters surcombed to bomber defensive fighter during the Guadalcanal campaign. (I just read of a rare success last night.....A tail Stinger from an Emily shot down a pursuing SBD on inner air patrol...a rare occurance that....shooting down a pursuing or attacking single engined beastie)

It was just simply **** hard to hit a small darting target with a hand/shoulder mounted single barreled pea shooter.....all the more so when your heart's pumpin and the airframe's virbrating and its so noisy you cant hear yourself think. So the fact that the A6M was "fragile" is somewhat irrelevant if it's not being struck by all that metal that jazzed bomber crewman are indescrimitivly spraying about. The issue of the A6M's inability to knock down large #'s of heavy bombers manifiests itself quite well thanks to the ARMOR and DUR ratings of the big planes they are at times called upon to attack.

Not saying bomber def fire should be made totally ineffective, but it certainly needs some serious toning down as right now, as already said a hundred times, bomber D-fire is as effective if not more so than the escorting fighters themselves, making them unnecessary.......something that would make Gen Kenney's eyeballs bulge.

Whatever Matrix does I just hope they dont bring back the return of the shadow boxing fighters......that would only replace one problem with another. I like how in 2.11, unescorted bombers get spanked more regularily now, even if that spanking is just in the form of damaged planes.....because do it too much and coupled with operational losses you soon wont have much of a bomber force left from which to use against opportunities closer to home. Note too that a few good "damages" will also serve to increase disruption and help spoil aims. Thus in the end, even if the fighters cant do the most important job of knocking em down so that they cant return and attempt their deadly deeds again....they can at least contribute to protecting the assets and ships below by their efforts. Return the shadow boxing fighter syndrome and players will be able to continue to ignore CAP's and distances to attack valuable assets with impunity....and there are simply not enough AAA assets lying around to make up the difference.

Its just that pesky bomber D-fire........its like each bomber has Quick Draw Mcgraw in the waist or turret gunner position......
So my suggestion remains, leave the air model alone but slash the ACC of the defensive fire big time. Killing fighters is the job of escorting fighters, bomber defenisve fire is the emergency backup and morale booster. Let us see no more fighter sweeps using strategic bombers