Matrix Games Forums

Anybody know what plane squadrons can upgrade to Rex or Rufe?

With withdraws I am down to only 3. I can't get tracker to tell me of any additional ones....

I have searched the forums, my float plane groups, and I am stymied!

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Anybody know what plane squadrons can upgrade to Rex or Rufe?

With withdraws I am down to only 3. I can't get tracker to tell me of any additional ones....

I have searched the forums, my float plane groups, and I am stymied!

Can´t you see that in Tracker?

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Can´t you see that in Tracker?

For whatever reason, my tracker upgrade path data has always been very hit or miss. I should really upgrade to the latest version, but currently it is showing nothing as being able to upgrade to the Rex or Rufe.

I solved my short term problem by dividing one unit into thirds, but it is a short term fix only. I hate dividing plane groups.

In other news I pulled the KAI Dinah (daytime Fighter) off from night time duty, and now the one squadron (size 49 is in the rear training pilots).

This turn could really be ugly...for either side.[X(]

This turn could really be ugly...for either side.

Why not both? That seems a reasonable expected outcome as well.

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

There is an inherent weakness of much controversy ...Having small TFs flood the search arcs of a CV TF while striking the CV might be seen as gamely .
It might be something worked out. I do know canoerebel used such a tactic and the controversy ended with CR never coming back to the forum.

Using merchant ships to mask the movement of fleet units?

It strikes me as something the Japanese would legitimately consider if they were faced with such a desperate situation. Even more so considering Lowpe has a merchant marine and enough fuel to use it, neither of which the Japanese had in real life.

If the Japanese had all these fueled cargo ships sitting about in 1945 when the Yamato sortied for Okinawa, I'm sure they'd have given the merchant crews rifles and told them to sail as the vanguard, break through the USN, beach their ships and join the fight as infantry.

What's the alternative? Leave them sitting in port to be farmed as VP's when the Allies bomb it?

Either option isn't fair: the merchant ships have a nominal military value that the Allies might find unfair if it's used (as a meat-shield for the IJN), while it's not really fair that the Japanese can't utilize the nominal military value of their merchant ships.

Does it exploit the game engine? I don't think so. There's plenty of examples of air attacks on unimportant targets allowing high-value targets to get off lightly.

ORIGINAL: Ingtar

This turn could really be ugly...for either side.

Why not both? That seems a reasonable expected outcome as well.

Perhaps, I would take that.

I finished my turn. I am not happy with it...but that is life.

Vectored subs...

Strikes at Deathstar. I chickened out, and didn't throw the Kitchen sink but set up three very nice attacks all at normal range from large HQa bases. I checked cruise speeds per Mr. Kane. The three attacks feature Kamikaze Helens, Kamikaze Zekes (high altitude) and dive bomber D4Y4s. All very heavily escorted with multiple squadrons and the other base squadrons stood down. Good pilots, good frames, good training, so maybe.

I fled with my KB to mid Honshu.

I fled with my merchant shipping.

Sense a trend here?[:(]

Fighter CAP over Tokyo down to 400 planes to provide planes for escorts against the deathstar.

Loading more fuel and oil in SRA for delivery to Camh Ran Bay and Hong Kong. Large tanker fleets leaving Canton for Palembang after unloading.

Running away in Thailand, seems the troops and reserves are moving well. Comes down to can I stack enough AA in the clear road of death hex near Bangkok to hold for a couple of days. Probably have 5-7 days to beef it up. Will have 5 AA there tomorrow.

Kamikaze notes...

I have had poor results using Kamikazes so far.[:(] It is me, as I have been doing a lot of experimenting. I have yet to try for a massive kamikaze attack, but I am in position to do so should I pull the trigger.

I have had several great chances, successfully forcing almost full squadrons thru against decent targets: BBs (several times at Hokkaido), Deathstar (twice), Destroyers (once).

My hit rate has been very poor. In order of best to worse: Zekes & Judies seem to hit. Helens have no hits that I can recall, Oscars one or two. Myojo maybe one hit, and they have had some great shots at battleships. I have not been scientific here, and weather certainly has played a part as some great attacks have gone thru in horrible weather. Pilot training in LowN has been variable too.

Even when I have used 60+ low naval my hit rate isn't great. Going forward all kamikazes will be trained to 65 lowN. That is what I am using this turn.

One thing I have some control over is the kamikaze pilots. I suspect this really hurts against heavy flak covered task forces. So going up against a strong flak TF, you really need high experience kamikazes. How do you get that? Perhaps general training?

The other thing I got to wondering about, does the plane maneuverability impact the chance to hit the enemy shipping? I brought this up before and the general consensus is that it doesn't.

Plane speed....lets you fly thru flak faster. Seems reasonable. That should really make the D4Y4 my best kamikaze.

Altitude. Is it easier to hit the enemy shipping flying low? Most of my kamikaze attacks have taken place at higher altitudes, and perhaps this is part of my problem. I understand the pilots always use lowN, but perhaps starting from higher up increases the miss chance? Don't know.

Altitude for escorts: now the attacks are all staged at the same altitude for everyone from large bases (with other planes stood down) and HQa influenced.

Altitude: I need to try some Georges on kamikaze strikes from 41K, to see if this avoids the enemy fighter CAP. I will most likely try this shortly. It seems really gamey to me, but I got to find something that works.

Durability - lets you absorb flak damage and keep going. Once the Allied fighters are thru my escorts Japanese bombers just die very fast no matter the model. I had hoped the Betty, bristling with 20mm cannons would put up a tougher resistance, but no joy.

Range: Normal versus extended. I am now trying to get all my attacks in at normal range (with escorts at no greater than normal range with drop tanks). I think perhaps I might just have a little better coordination here and perhaps the fighters will do a better job at escorting the bombers.

Squadron targeting: Most times I am happy with the planes the kamikazes strike, but sometimes they go for the darn destroyers. I read somewhere that Naval skill in the Squadron Commander might help the squadron pilots pick out the juicy targets, good DL certainly will help here too.

So, I am still trying different strategies in an attempt to find joy with Kamikazes.

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

There is an inherent weakness of much controversy ...Having small TFs flood the search arcs of a CV TF while striking the CV might be seen as gamely .
It might be something worked out. I do know canoerebel used such a tactic and the controversy ended with CR never coming back to the forum.

Using merchant ships to mask the movement of fleet units?

It strikes me as something the Japanese would legitimately consider if they were faced with such a desperate situation. Even more so considering Lowpe has a merchant marine and enough fuel to use it, neither of which the Japanese had in real life.

If the Japanese had all these fueled cargo ships sitting about in 1945 when the Yamato sortied for Okinawa, I'm sure they'd have given the merchant crews rifles and told them to sail as the vanguard, break through the USN, beach their ships and join the fight as infantry.

What's the alternative? Leave them sitting in port to be farmed as VP's when the Allies bomb it?

Either option isn't fair: the merchant ships have a nominal military value that the Allies might find unfair if it's used (as a meat-shield for the IJN), while it's not really fair that the Japanese can't utilize the nominal military value of their merchant ships.

Does it exploit the game engine? I don't think so. There's plenty of examples of air attacks on unimportant targets allowing high-value targets to get off lightly.

I am not going to use them as a meat shield. They will just eventually all be sunk hiding.

However, I do see your point.

Wasn't there a Navy war game years back when the opfor flooded the American navy with hordes of small ships in a USN vs Iran simulation in the Gulf. I seem to recall the USN cried foul...but it does point out a potential weakness.

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

There is an inherent weakness of much controversy ...Having small TFs flood the search arcs of a CV TF while striking the CV might be seen as gamely .
It might be something worked out. I do know canoerebel used such a tactic and the controversy ended with CR never coming back to the forum.

Using merchant ships to mask the movement of fleet units?

It strikes me as something the Japanese would legitimately consider if they were faced with such a desperate situation. Even more so considering Lowpe has a merchant marine and enough fuel to use it, neither of which the Japanese had in real life.

If the Japanese had all these fueled cargo ships sitting about in 1945 when the Yamato sortied for Okinawa, I'm sure they'd have given the merchant crews rifles and told them to sail as the vanguard, break through the USN, beach their ships and join the fight as infantry.

What's the alternative? Leave them sitting in port to be farmed as VP's when the Allies bomb it?

Either option isn't fair: the merchant ships have a nominal military value that the Allies might find unfair if it's used (as a meat-shield for the IJN), while it's not really fair that the Japanese can't utilize the nominal military value of their merchant ships.

Does it exploit the game engine? I don't think so. There's plenty of examples of air attacks on unimportant targets allowing high-value targets to get off lightly.

I am not going to use them as a meat shield. They will just eventually all be sunk hiding.

However, I do see your point.

Wasn't there a Navy war game years back when the opfor flooded the American navy with hordes of small ships in a USN vs Iran simulation in the Gulf. I seem to recall the USN cried foul...but it does point out a potential weakness.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

Don't use the term meat-shield, they're ablative armor! Or you use them as sheep to hide the wolves!

I say get some military use out of them. If the Japanese historically had the ships and fuel lying around, they surely would have put them to some use!

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

Don't use the term meat-shield, they're ablative armor! Or you use them as sheep to hide the wolves!

I say get some military use out of them. If the Japanese historically had the ships and fuel lying around, they surely would have put them to some use!

Yep, that's it.

I was looking at historical Japanese plane production....pretty fascinating, but one plane really stood out and that was Sonia.

I bet there aren't too many AARs where Japan builds 2300 of these planes over the course of the war. Interesting to see that she carried a 250 kg bomb for suicide operations.

Anyhow:

The Mitsubishi Ki-51 (Army designation "Type 99 Assault Plane". Allied nickname "Sonia") was a light bomber/dive bomber in service with the Imperial Japanese Army during World War II. It first flew in mid-1939. Initially deployed against Chinese forces, it proved to be too slow to hold up against the fighter aircraft of the other Allied powers. However, it performed a useful ground-attack role in the China-Burma-India theater, notably from airfields too rough for many other aircraft. As the war drew to a close, they began to be used in kamikaze attacks. Total production was around 2,385 units.

On the day Hiroshima was destroyed by an atomic bomb, two Ki-51s scored the last Japanese sinking of a US warship, sinking USS Bullhead (SS-332) with all hands.

Charles Lindbergh, flying a P-38 Lightning shot down a Ki-51 after a vigorous dogfight in which the much slower Ki-51 utilized its low speed maneuverability and made a fight of it.

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Kamikaze notes...

I have had poor results using Kamikazes so far.[:(] It is me, as I have been doing a lot of experimenting. I have yet to try for a massive kamikaze attack, but I am in position to do so should I pull the trigger.

Everyone does experimenting. There is a few general rules how increase effectiveness. But the most important is your opponent play style. If he is not dividing his forces, whatever you do it will be very difficult to hurt him.

I have had several great chances, successfully forcing almost full squadrons thru against decent targets: BBs (several times at Hokkaido), Deathstar (twice), Destroyers (once).

You can have hundred missed opportunities, it does not count. What is count is the one you did not miss.
So, keeping trying is the way.

My hit rate has been very poor. In order of best to worse: Zekes & Judies seem to hit. Helens have no hits that I can recall, Oscars one or two. Myojo maybe one hit, and they have had some great shots at battleships. I have not been scientific here, and weather certainly has played a part as some great attacks have gone thru in horrible weather. Pilot training in LowN has been variable too.

Even when I have used 60+ low naval my hit rate isn't great. Going forward all kamikazes will be trained to 65 lowN. That is what I am using this turn.

One thing I have some control over is the kamikaze pilots. I suspect this really hurts against heavy flak covered task forces. So going up against a strong flak TF, you really need high experience kamikazes. How do you get that? Perhaps general training?

The other thing I got to wondering about, does the plane maneuverability impact the chance to hit the enemy shipping? I brought this up before and the general consensus is that it doesn't.

Plane speed....lets you fly thru flak faster. Seems reasonable. That should really make the D4Y4 my best kamikaze.

Altitude. Is it easier to hit the enemy shipping flying low? Most of my kamikaze attacks have taken place at higher altitudes, and perhaps this is part of my problem. I understand the pilots always use lowN, but perhaps starting from higher up increases the miss chance? Don't know.

Hit rate depend on skill, ship's manoeuvrability, ship's capitan skill, airframe type, flak's strength.
Generally base on me experience it goes like this: DB > FB/F > PB/TB > 2E > 4E.
To avoid flak you need experience but to survive flak you need defensive skill.
And all skills are become really meaningful when they are 70+. You will not see big difference between pilots with skill 50 and 60, but there is huge difference between pilot with skill 60 and 70+.
And please remember to target big fat BB or CV your pilot need search skill too, ether way there will be a lot of pointless charge against escort.

Altitude for escorts: now the attacks are all staged at the same altitude for everyone from large bases (with other planes stood down) and HQa influenced.

Altitude: I need to try some Georges on kamikaze strikes from 41K, to see if this avoids the enemy fighter CAP. I will most likely try this shortly. It seems really gamey to me, but I got to find something that works.

Frank should perform this type of attack much better, (speed + nice payload).

Durability - lets you absorb flak damage and keep going. Once the Allied fighters are thru my escorts Japanese bombers just die very fast no matter the model. I had hoped the Betty, bristling with 20mm cannons would put up a tougher resistance, but no joy.

Japanese bomber's defensive is useless, they are missing close formation bonus which makes allied bombers so dangerous.

Good luck.

ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Charles Lindbergh, flying a P-38 Lightning shot down a Ki-51 after a vigorous dogfight in which the much slower Ki-51 utilized its low speed maneuverability and made a fight of it.

Similar story happens to Saburo in China. He used his Zeros manoeuvrability to avoid group of Hellcats over Iwo-Jima in 1944 too.
Speed does not fix fight, but it allow to control it.

March 19, 1944

No night bombing.

Deathstar moves east and sweeps and bombs Hiroshima. Many xakls destroyed in port. I lost 24 ships of 3 vp or less. 5 ACM gone.

Allied planes sweep and bomb Yokohama. Sweeps first, Avengers and SBDs second, and then 4Es. The large Tony factory is wiped out to 1 (from 74); Frank a factory is destroyed 0(20); and the Ha 32 factory is knocked in half to 60.

The Fletcher Halford that ate two 800kg is still alive, it made 6 hexes yesterday, and was protected by a storm front, then it dodged a couple of torpedoes (escorts then sunk the sub) and now it is on Hokkaido.

Subs south of Paramushiro can't penetrate the screen of a large resupply convoy.

Allies bomb heavily in Thailand.

I have destroyed 450 B24D1, 400 B24J but they keep coming...

My carefully hoarded supply of vehicle points for the upcoming Armor units and upgrades is wiped out this turn as two HQ's appear as reinforcements: an Air and a Ground. Both are modern HQs with motorized support.

The first draws 60 motorized support; the second 15 of 60. Exactly 25%. This represent emergency replacements (wrong technical term, but you get the idea) and I believe I wasn't charged for the 15 motorized support in vehicle points. I certainly didn't have enough vehicle points to pay for them (motorized is 15 load).

So when I get the 27th Tank Regiment in 5 days it will come on with 25% Equipment due to my vehicle point shortage.

I get another HQ unit with motorized support in 2 days, and interestingly enough it is listed as coming in with 18 Motorized support currently. Pretty neat how this game works.[;)]

Well, here is to hoping the Allies don't keep nailing my plane & engine production. Fat chance...

He has cottoned on to a good strategy of using the basically unlimited planes in the Avenger/SBDs line to lead the 4E in. So at some point he will need to strike west to get them within range of western Honshu or wait for the longer legged fighters to start.

I don't see him waiting to 45 for that though.

My best guess is now either an invasion within land based air cover, or an invasion at a weaker spot on western Honshu rely upon the might of the USN heavily concentrated.

I guess it seems most likely he will do the latter.

In Radar v GreyJoy, Radar lost most of his big surface ships trying for shore bombardments of Hokkaido. I haven't even tried. Instead, I am trying to save them so as to delay a possible western Honshu invasion.

But I need to put some kind of hurt on the Deathstar....this day he was one hex out of range of a strike from Nagasaki, 2 hexes out of range of the KB.

I bet he continues to sail east with the Deathstar. I have been consistently wrong at predicting where it goes.[&:]

It is a donnybrook! Harsh words are being exchanged by both sides, but not much actual combat.

The center can't hold with the flank turned...

Run hard, run fast, it will be exciting....

thanks Lowpe for the candid discussion on Kamikazes.

What's the largest Kamikaze attack you've launched so far? I'm wondering if it really is a mass numbers game in one battle, combined with the lowNav skill and escorts to protect them on the way in etc. From what I've read somewhere before (and experienced) extended range attacks are almost always a no-no. Ops losses are higher, maybe morale and other rolls take a hit? I don't know for sure though but somewhere I think a dev mentioned that using aircraft at extended range is heavily penalized. Also, if Japan would send their best battleship on a suicide mission against the US fleet and thousands of kamikaze pilots, of course they would send barely armed merchantmen! ISIS is winning and they still use suicide bombers for their first waves...


@mind_messing: This link was amazing, thanks. Not surprising given military bureaucracies but also I bet some people paid attention and learned a lesson for us:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

ORIGINAL: leehunt27@bloomberg.net

thanks Lowpe for the candid discussion on Kamikazes.

What's the largest Kamikaze attack you've launched so far? I'm wondering if it really is a mass numbers game in one battle, combined with the lowNav skill and escorts to protect them on the way in etc. From what I've read somewhere before (and experienced) extended range attacks are almost always a no-no. Ops losses are higher, maybe morale and other rolls take a hit? I don't know for sure though but somewhere I think a dev mentioned that using aircraft at extended range is heavily penalized. Also, if Japan would send their best battleship on a suicide mission against the US fleet and thousands of kamikaze pilots, of course they would send barely armed merchantmen! ISIS is winning and they still use suicide bombers for their first waves...


@mind_messing: This link was amazing, thanks. Not surprising given military bureaucracies but also I bet some people paid attention and learned a lesson for us:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

I have not yet launched more than one squadron at a time. I have a nice little area, west of the Deathstar's current location, where it would be hit by 3 separate locations (100 kamikazes) and each kamikaze squadron escorted by 3 squadrons of fighters. But the Allies aren't cooperating. Go figure.

I am contemplating other actions: setting all Frances and Betty planes to torpedo strikes, each squadron at a different base and at a different altitude with one squadron of fighters for escorts. And then close in strikes with single engine bombers with as much fighter escort as I have.

My thinking is the single engine planes attack first and hopefully start wearing the CAP down, and then in the end it is the Betties/Frances that do the real killing.

I think I am going to give this strategy a try this turn.