Night bombing, gamey tactics and "officialness"

Gary Grigsby's strategic level wargame covering the entire War in the Pacific from 1941 to 1945 or beyond.

Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
acmejeff
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 5:12 am

RE: Night bombing, gamey tactics and "officialness"

Post by acmejeff »

One type of sortie I did not see mentioned was your transports. Unless you were counting them in with the 400 you added to cover unknown flights. I would think transport missions could add greatly to the sortie total.
User avatar
Tristanjohn
Posts: 3027
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 4:50 am
Location: Daly City CA USA
Contact:

RE: Night bombing, gamey tactics and "officialness"

Post by Tristanjohn »

ORIGINAL: Nomad

What ever, I see you are still a very conceited person.

It's conceited for me to expect you to read what I wrote? Whatever. Have a nice day. [8D]
Regarding Frank Jack Fletcher: They should have named an oiler after him instead. -- Irrelevant
User avatar
Tristanjohn
Posts: 3027
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 4:50 am
Location: Daly City CA USA
Contact:

RE: Night bombing, gamey tactics and "officialness"

Post by Tristanjohn »

ORIGINAL: acmejeff

One type of sortie I did not see mentioned was your transports. Unless you were counting them in with the 400 you added to cover unknown flights. I would think transport missions could add greatly to the sortie total.

I didn't mention transports, but perhaps I should have only to be complete.

I only have a handful of C-47s on the board. The Dutch stuff went south with the SRA. The transports I do have in hand are all grounded. I don't need to get supply anywhere at the moment, neither do I plan on an airdrop anytime soon. So, the total sorties for transports in my game comes to zero. (In fact, I've only used transports a couple of times, just to see if the transport of supplies worked. As far as I can tell it does not work, or if it does it'sl all but impossible to tell from the game, as 1) there's no animation for it as was the case in UV, and 2) the supposed message on the combat-replay screen over on the left-hand margin which is supposed to come at the end of the turn . . . never comes for me. I've reported this to no avail over in the support forum. ON the other hand, others report no problem with the transport of supplies, so it might be the case that either I just can't find the message somehow, or there's a special/random bug in my PBEM that causes this apparent glitch.)

Go into your game and check this out for yourself. I'm confident you'll find your actual sorties per turn less than what's being listed the same as I do. Why would it be different?

Meanwhile, even with being "generous" to a fault with my math I still find myself some 1,000 sorties short of what the intelligence screen lists. That's a fair-sized black hole if you ask me.

Regarding Frank Jack Fletcher: They should have named an oiler after him instead. -- Irrelevant
User avatar
Tristanjohn
Posts: 3027
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 4:50 am
Location: Daly City CA USA
Contact:

RE: Night bombing, gamey tactics and "officialness"

Post by Tristanjohn »

ORIGINAL: acmejeff

One type of sortie I did not see mentioned was your transports. Unless you were counting them in with the 400 you added to cover unknown flights. I would think transport missions could add greatly to the sortie total.

One other type of sortie I didn't mention, but was covered by me in terms of adding extra sortie weght to my calculations, would be transfers of planes between bases. In my game this is isn't much, as my aircraft are pretty much based where they're needed. The one regular exception to this are my transfers of bombers between Townsville and Port Moresby, but this never comes to more than 100 or so sorties in any given turn, and as I say, I've made an effort to account for this by generously adding extra sorties to my total to make up for this kind of accounting slack. Even so I find my total a good thousand below the machine's.
Regarding Frank Jack Fletcher: They should have named an oiler after him instead. -- Irrelevant
User avatar
Hoplosternum
Posts: 663
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 8:39 pm
Location: Romford, England

RE: Night bombing, gamey tactics and "officialness"

Post by Hoplosternum »

Hi TJ,

You have counted the fighters on CAP twice (which I dare say the Computer does regardless of how many actually intercept). But have you done the same with all ASW, Naval Strike and Naval Search squadrons? Even if nothing is found they are still being 'rolled for' twice a day. The same with Training flights if you have any. I think only Port and Airbase attacks are once a day affairs. Could this make up the difference?
User avatar
Tristanjohn
Posts: 3027
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 4:50 am
Location: Daly City CA USA
Contact:

RE: Night bombing, gamey tactics and "officialness"

Post by Tristanjohn »

ORIGINAL: Hoplosternum

Hi TJ,

You have counted the fighters on CAP twice (which I dare say the Computer does regardless of how many actually intercept). But have you done the same with all ASW, Naval Strike and Naval Search squadrons? Even if nothing is found they are still being 'rolled for' twice a day. The same with Training flights if you have any. I think only Port and Airbase attacks are once a day affairs. Could this make up the difference?

For everything that flies twice automatically (for instance, ASW) yes, I counted twice. For planes on naval attack with 10% search I used that percentage. I then figured in the few actual naval attacks I had that previous, plane for plane. That was easy.

At the moment I have no training flights. As I understand it this only trains pilots up to around 50 or 55, and all of mine now are above that level.

Look. I bent over backward to be fair to the computer, added in 600 extra sorties (200 once, 400 the next and final time) just to be sure I was fair, and I still came up 1,000 sorties short. [8D]



Regarding Frank Jack Fletcher: They should have named an oiler after him instead. -- Irrelevant
Post Reply

Return to “War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945”